[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1cbbc4df-fdf8-4ef2-b332-bf3334e9d2b9@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 18:08:48 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jiri@...nulli.us, horms@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/6] net: tn40xx: add basic Rx handling
On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 06:34:05AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 01 May 2024 15:16:16 +0900 (JST) FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > drivers/net/ethernet/tehuti/tn40.c:318:37: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size [-Wint-to-pointer-cast]
> > > 318 | dm->off, (void *)dm->dma);
> > > | ^
> >
> > My bad. Fixed. I should have found this warning in patchwork before.
>
> No you shouldn't have. The patchwork warnings are for maintainers,
> it's not a public CI.
Expanding on that a bit. Its not a secret patchwork shows some CI
results. What we don't want is developers posting 1/2 baked patches to
the list in order that the CI picks them up and tests them. Hence the
"not a public CI".
We expect developers do their own mechanical build testing before
posting patches. Build with W=1 C=1 etc. Build a couple of different
architectures, ideally a 32 and a 64 bit. Build the documentation,
etc.
Reviewer and maintainer time is limited. So ideally we want the
developer to do the mechanical work, leaving the reviewers to
concentrate on things which cannot be reviewed mechanically, like
architecture, logic bugs, conforming to the processes.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists