netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 01/22] bnx2x: Support probing and removing of VF device

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20121115.150954.101071502783675300.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:09:54 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ariele@...adcom.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, eilong@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 01/22] bnx2x: Support probing and removing
 of VF device

From: "Ariel Elior" <ariele@...adcom.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:47:26 +0200

I'm very angry, I told you guys to fix the coding style issues in this
patch set, and you didn't even fix the class of problems I
specifically asked to be fixed.  Even the very first hunk in the very
first patch has the exact problem I said you MUST resolve.

> To support probing and removing of a bnx2x virtual function
> the following were added:
> 1. add bnx2x_vfpf.h: defines the VF to PF channel
> 2. add bnx2x_sriov.h: header for bnx2x SR-IOV functionality
> 3. enumerate VF hw types (identify VFs)
> 4. if driving a VF, map VF bar
> 5. if driving a VF, allocate Vf to PF channel
> 6. refactor interrupt flows to include VF
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ariel Elior <ariele@...adcom.com>
> Signed-off-by: Eilon Greenstein <eilong@...adcom.com>

Please stop wasting reviewer resources, because that is what
you are doing when the very first hunk we see in a huge patch
submission is something like this:

> +enum bnx2x_int_mode {
> +	BNX2X_INT_MODE_MSIX,
> +	BNX2X_INT_MODE_INTX,
> +	BNX2X_INT_MODE_MSI
> +};
> +
> +
> +

There is no reason to have 3 blank lines here, one is more than
sufficient.

Tell me, what exactly was NOT clear in the directives I gave you for
the previous submission 2 days ago:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=135283453929818&w=2

I said, remove graduitous empty lines.  That's what I asked for, and
the very first first patch starts by adding gratuitous empty lines.

Re-audit this entire patch series and do not even think about
resubmitting this until such coding style problems are eliminated.

In fact, I'm going to ignore any patches you submit for the next week,
you're officially on my crap list.  Don't even think about
resubmitting this patch series until next Thursday at the earliest.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html