[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210816183859.GG7722@kadam>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 21:38:59 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
"Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [greybus-dev] [PATCH v2] staging: greybus: Convert uart.c from
IDR to XArray
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 09:36:39PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 10:10:04AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> > On 8/16/21 10:06 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 05:01:02PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 09:46:08AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> > > > > On 8/14/21 1:11 PM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > > > > Convert greybus/uart.c from IDR to XArray. The abstract data type XArray
> > > > > > is more memory-efficient, parallelisable, and cache friendly. It takes
> > > > > > advantage of RCU to perform lookups without locking. Furthermore, IDR is
> > > > > > deprecated because XArray has a better (cleaner and more consistent) API.
> > > > >
> > > > > I haven't verified the use of the new API (yet) but I have a few
> > > > > comments on your patch, below.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Alex
> > > > >
> > > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure I'm right about this... But the actual change you're
> > > > > making has nothing to do with what the Intel test robot reported.
> > > > > I personally find the "Reported-by" here a little misleading, but
> > > > > maybe the "Link" line that gets added will provide explanation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway, unless someone else contradicts/corrects me, I'd rather
> > > > > not have the "Reported-by" here (despite wanting to provide much
> > > > > credit to <lkp@...el.com>...).
> > > >
> > > > You are correct, "Reported-by:" does not make sense here.
> > >
> > > There should be a Fixes-from: tag for bugs found in review (not style
> > > issues) but when I suggest it then people just say to use the
> > > Reported-by tag.
> >
> > I think things caught during review aren't normally worthy
> > of specific mention in the commit message (though maybe in
> > the non-committed part under "---"). I mean, that's what
> > review is for. And in the case of what <lkp@...el.com>
> > does, that's effectively a technical aspect of "review."
>
> I'm not talking about stuff like intending or naming schemes, I'm
*indenting*... *sigh*.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists