[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150406.170106.811076629093466625.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 17:01:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: maheshb@...gle.com
Cc: j.vosburgh@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net, vfalico@...il.com,
nikolay@...hat.com, maze@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1] bonding: cosmetic/readability changes for
admin, oper-key ops
From: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 13:54:00 -0700
> Signed-off-by: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
This is a very low quality patch submission.
You aren't explaining what you are really doing, or why.
Furthermore:
> @@ -1756,8 +1758,6 @@ static void ad_initialize_port(struct port *port, int lacp_fast)
> port->actor_system_priority = 0xffff;
> port->actor_port_aggregator_identifier = 0;
> port->ntt = false;
> - port->actor_admin_port_key = 1;
> - port->actor_oper_port_key = 1;
> port->actor_admin_port_state = AD_STATE_AGGREGATION |
> AD_STATE_LACP_ACTIVITY;
> port->actor_oper_port_state = AD_STATE_AGGREGATION |
This is not just a readability or cosmetic change, it is changing behavior.
You need to describe why removing these initializers is valid, and also
this change is outside of the scope of a cosmetic/readability change so
would need to be split into another patch.
It is almost never correct to have an empty commit log message, espcially
when real changes are being made to the code as is happening here in this
code block.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists