linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: ctree: reduce args where only fs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 22 Nov 2014 00:52:36 +0100
From:	David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
To:	Daniel Dressler <danieru.dressler@...il.com>
Cc:	dsterba@...e.cz, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
	Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
	"open list:BTRFS FILE SYSTEM" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: ctree: reduce args where only fs_info used

On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 01:03:32AM +0900, Daniel Dressler wrote:
> No problem, I'll redo everything so it is one function per patch. Now
> fair warning: there are about 102 functions to cleanup. I was a bit
> worried that many patches would cause too much maintainer overhead but
> it is no problem for me.

Yeah, I'm aware that it's all over the sources. I'd say send no more
than 30 patches in a burst first and see how it'd work.

> Only a few functions have dependecies on
> other functions needing cleanup. Thus there will be some small patch
> series for those function sets. A big benefit of one function one
> patch is that extent-io.c will no longer be a 34 function monster
> patch.
> 
> Is there any rate limiting I should be doing? I don't want to flood
> the list with burst of dozen plus patches, or is that an okay volume?

Should be fine.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/