netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v9 0/9] Implement devlink-rate API and extend it

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: <0fae56f9-ae5d-1c27-3a91-8d62289c337e@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Nov 2022 19:10:53 +0100
From:   "Wilczynski, Michal" <michal.wilczynski@...el.com>
To:     Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>,
        <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
        <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>,
        <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v9 0/9] Implement devlink-rate API and extend it



On 11/8/2022 5:54 PM, Jacob Keller wrote:
>
>
> On 11/8/2022 12:08 AM, Wilczynski, Michal wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/7/2022 7:31 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 19:18:10 +0100 Wilczynski, Michal wrote:
>>>> I provided some documentation in v10 in ice.rst file.
>>>> Unfortunately there is no devlink-rate.rst as far as I can
>>>> tell and at some point we even discussed adding this with Edward,
>>>> but honestly I think this could be added in a separate patch
>>>> series to not unnecessarily prolong merging this.
>>> You can't reply to email and then immediately post a new version :/
>>> How am I supposed to have a conversation with you? Extremely annoying.
>>
>> I'm sorry if you find this annoying, however I can't see any harm here ?
>> I fixed some legit issues that you've pointed in v9, wrote some
>> documentation and basically said, "I wrote some documentation in
>> the next patchset, is it enough ?". I think it's better to get feedback
>> for smaller commits faster, this way I send the updated patchset
>> quickly.
>>
>
> From 
> https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-netdev.html?highlight=netdev
>
>> 2. netdev FAQ¶
>> 2.1. tl;dr¶
>> designate your patch to a tree - [PATCH net] or [PATCH net-next]
>>
>> for fixes the Fixes: tag is required, regardless of the tree
>>
>> don’t post large series (> 15 patches), break them up
>>
>> don’t repost your patches within one 24h period
>>
>> reverse xmas tree
>
> Giving everyone at least 24 hours per posting (if not more) helps 
> ensure that limited reviewer time doesn't get overloaded by constantly 
> re-reviewing the same code. It also helps ensure that everyone has a 
> chance to look at the patches.

Again, I'm sorry if my actions were annoying, or seemed overly impatient.
My question would be then, when I am allowed to re-post v11 ?
Technically I didn't re-post my series during 24h period, I just responded
to comments after re-sending a new version :(.
I guess I should wait for Kuba response now, and only after getting a
response re-send a v11  ?

Thanks,
Michał


>
> Thanks,
> Jake