linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] net/mlx4: Use true,false for bool variable

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:37:34 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Vasyl Gomonovych <gomonovych@...il.com>, tariqt@...dia.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net/mlx4: Use true,false for bool variable

On Tue, 2020-12-15 at 07:18 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:15:01AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > I prefer revisions to single patches (as opposed to large patch series)
> > in the same thread.
> 
> It depends which side you are in that game. From the reviewer point of
> view, such submission breaks flow very badly. It unfolds the already
> reviewed thread, messes with the order and many more little annoying
> things.

This is where I disagree with you.  I am a reviewer here.

Not having context to be able to inspect vN -> vN+1 is made
more difficult not having the original patch available and
having to search history for it.

Almost no one adds URL links to older submissions below the ---.

Were that a standard mechanism below the --- line, then it would
be OK.