[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YbtUME6fjjHjy3Kr@zn.tnic>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:58:56 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>,
Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
Chen Zhou <dingguo.cz@...group.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 03/10] x86: kdump: use macro CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX in
functions reserve_crashkernel()
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 10:11:15PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> As for the code refactoring, it can be done in another patchset.
Well, I said "future work" before having seen where this patchset is
going. So no, in that case, the usual kernel development process is:
cleanups/fixes first - new features later.
You can see for yourself that piling more crap on what is an already
unreadable mess is only going to make it worse. So, in order to avoid
the maintenance nightmare, we clean up, streamline, document and then
add the new feature and all is shiny.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists