[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <yq1tw1j9tjh.fsf@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 13:28:18 -0400
From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
Cc: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@...il.com>,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, mdr@....com,
hare@...e.com, aacraid@...ptec.com, matthew@....cx,
fthain@...egraphics.com.au, schmitzmic@...il.com,
kashyap.desai@...adcom.com, sumit.saxena@...adcom.com,
gotom@...ian.or.jp, mrochs@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
yokota@...lab.is.tsukuba.ac.jp, QLogic-Storage-Upstream@...ium.com,
jinpu.wang@...fitbricks.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/29] constify scsi pci_device_id.
Johannes,
> Ultimately it's up to Martin and James but I don't see a hughe benefit
> in having it all in a separate patch.
Generally speaking, I prefer driver maintainers to be able to sign off
on changes to their code. So I tend to lean towards a per-driver
grouping.
However, having a bazillion identical commit messages is also really
annoying. So for automated changes like this, I'd rather just have a
single patch.
It needs to have a really good and comprehensive commit messages that
justifies the (sub) tree-wide change, though...
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
Powered by blists - more mailing lists