netdev - Re: [RESEND PATCH net-next v4 00/25] net: dpaa: Cleanups in preparation for phylink conversion

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:   Thu, 18 Aug 2022 12:28:03 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Camelia Groza <camelia.groza@....com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Madalin Bucur <madalin.bucur@....com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH net-next v4 00/25] net: dpaa: Cleanups in
 preparation for phylink conversion

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:14:04 -0400 Sean Anderson wrote:
> > Ack, no question. I'm trying to tell you got to actually get stuff in.
> > It's the first week after the merge window and people are dumping code
> > the had written over the dead time on the list, while some reviewers
> > and maintainers are still on their summer vacation. So being
> > considerate is even more important than normally.  
> 
> OK, so perhaps a nice place to split the series is after patch 11. If
> you would like to review/apply a set of <15 patches, that is the place
> to break things. I can of course resend again with just those, if that's
> what I need to do to get these applied.

Mm, okay, let's give folks the customary 24h to object, otherwise I'll
pull in the first 11 tomorrow.

> That said, I specifically broke this series up into many small patches
> to make it easier to review. Each patch does exactly one thing. Had I
> known about these limits based on patch size, I would have just squashed
> everything into 15 patches. I think an arbitrary limit such as this has
> a perverse incentive.

Practically speaking I think it works out fairly nicely, IDK.
There's trade offs like always. Takes a bit of getting used to.