netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 01/10] net: dsa: lan9303: Fixed MDIO interface

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]

Message-ID: <d3fc8c2e-6fba-78b6-ca27-2535de600279@egil-hjelmeland.no>
Date:   Wed, 26 Jul 2017 16:50:16 +0200
From:   Egil Hjelmeland <privat@...l-hjelmeland.no>
To:     Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>,
        corbet@....net, andrew@...n.ch, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 01/10] net: dsa: lan9303: Fixed MDIO interface

On 26. juli 2017 16:30, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> Hi Egil,
> 
> Egil Hjelmeland <privat@...l-hjelmeland.no> writes:
> 
>>> I'd suggest you to split up this one commit in several *atomic* and easy
>>> to review patches and send them separately as on thread named "net: dsa:
>>> lan9303: fix MDIO interface" (also note that imperative is prefered for
>>> subject lines, see: https://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/#imperative)
>>
>> I can split the first patch.
>>
>> I can also split the patch series to more digestible series. But
>> since most of the patches touches the same file, I assume that each
>> series must be completed and applied before starting on a new one.
>> So I really want to group the patches into only a few series in order
>> to not spend months on the process.
> 
> I understand. But believe me, your patches are very likely to land
> mainline faster if you send them in small chunks. This might not be true
> for every subsystems, but netdev is very responsive. This is even more
> true since this series has no-no (such as the sysfs entries) which
> guarantees the whole patch series to be rejected.
> 
> Sending portions of your local work branch then rebase it against
> net-next/master is a usual development process.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>          Vivien
> 

Thank you for the advice. I got some other NMIs today that I have to
serve. Hope to come back with MDIO patch series soon.

Egil