linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 00/12] wifi: mwifiex: added code to support host mlme.

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Fri, 01 Dec 2023 14:25:14 +0200
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To:     Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>
Cc:     David Lin <yu-hao.lin@....com>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, briannorris@...omium.org,
        tsung-hsien.hsieh@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/12] wifi: mwifiex: added code to support host mlme.

Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it> writes:

> Hello Lin,
> thanks for the patches here, I can clearly see that this code is going
> through some real testing given the improvements you did lately.
>
> I have commented on the single patches, and honestly I did not look into
> the code details at the moment.
>
> The major feedback from me is the following:
>  1 - you should not add code with a bug and than fix a bug in the same
>      series, you should have a non buggy patch in the first place (e.g.
>      git --amend). (this applies till the patch is not merged into the
>      maintainer tree, of course).
>  2 - point 1 applies also to reviewer comments
>  3 - if you have fixes that are not connected to the feature addition
>      you are doing is beneficial to have those separated, this makes
>      reviewing easier, they can be "prioritized" to some extent (given
>      that they are fixes) and follow a slightly different patch flow
>      (they can get applied, depending on the maintainers decision, when the
>      merge window is closed and should be backported). Not to mention
>      that smaller patch series are appreciated, "Maximum of 7-12 patches
>      per patchset " from [1]
>
> In general I would suggest you to have a look at [1], not sure how up to
> date is that compared to the in-tree Documentation/process/.

I haven't looked at the actual patches but a generic comment from me is
that usually it's not a good idea for newcomers to submit a huge
patchset like this. Start with something small, just with one patch
first, learn the process and what we require from patches. After you
have gained more knowledge you can start doing more complex stuff.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches