[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170109190424.GE3781@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 17:04:24 -0200
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 0/5] sctp: add support for generating stream
reconf chunks
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 02:27:09AM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:53 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
> > Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 07:43:25 -0500
> >
> >> These all look reasonably good, but it seems before we accept them,
> >> there should be an additional patch that actually makes use of the code.
> >> I presume that is forthcomming?
> >
> > This all comes from my asking that the original huge set of patches be
> > split up.
> >
> > People always just rush this kind of work and never think about laying
> > out the resubmission properly.
> >
> > One should always only submit new interfaces along with an actual use
> > because only with a use can we properly review whether the new
> > interface is good or not.
>
> I was trying to keep the same order with rfc, but it seems not a good
> idea, will resplit, thanks.
Not sure how much it can help but one idea it to split it into requester
and requested sides. Do the first patches/patchsets to make Linux able
to accept/handle requests, and then to issue requests.
Marcelo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists