[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <683187e0-2e6a-88c0-f87a-9c5f0489370a@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 21:51:09 +0200
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: IB/core: Fine-tuning for ib_is_udata_cleared()
>> A few update suggestions were taken into account
>> from static source code analysis.
>
> Don't introduce a defect in patch 1 and correct
> that introduced defect in patch 2.
Which detail do you not like here?
> This should be a single patch.
Do any more software software developers would like to get
the proposed changes in a single update step?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists