[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGxU2F5_vZ8S7uoU4QF=J0jh11y976+AxFKf94dp01Fctq-ZwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:34:19 +0200
From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To: Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/4] vsock/virtio: Reduce indentation in virtio_transport_wait_close()
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 at 12:30, Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co> wrote:
>
> On 4/30/25 11:28, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 11:10:28AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
> >> Flatten the function. Remove the nested block by inverting the condition:
> >> return early on !timeout.
> >
> > IIUC we are removing this function in the next commit, so we can skip
> > this patch IMO. I suggested this change, if we didn't move the code in
> > the core.
> Right, I remember your suggestion. Sorry, I'm still a bit uncertain as to
> what should and shouldn't be done in a single commit.
Sorry for the confusion :-)
The rule I usually follow is this (but may not be the perfect one):
- try to make the fewest changes in a commit, to simplify both
backports, but also for debug/revert/bisection/etc.
- when I move code around and edit it a bit, then it's okay to edit
style, comments, etc.
Thanks,
Stefano
Powered by blists - more mailing lists