[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <382906f0-ce0b-282a-9665-8317b50fe374@deltatee.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 11:18:20 -0600
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com>,
Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>,
Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] nvmet: Introduce common execute function for
get_log_page and identify
On 2019-10-23 7:17 p.m., Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 10:35:41AM -0600, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>> Instead of picking the sub-command handler to execute in a nested
>> switch statement introduce a landing functions that calls out
>> to the appropriate sub-command handler.
>>
>> This will allow us to have a common place in the handler to check
>> the transfer length in a future patch.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
>> [logang@...tatee.com: separated out of a larger draft patch from hch]
>> Signed-off-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
>
> First signoff needs to be the From line picked up by git. I don't really
> care if you keep my attribution or not, but if you do it needs From
> line for me as the first theing in the mail body, and if not it
> should drop by signoff and just say based on a patch from me.
>
> Otherwise the series looks fine.
Ok, understood. Do you want me to fix this up in a v2? Or can you fix it
up when you pick up the patches?
Thanks,
Logan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists