On 6/14/2016 3:02 AM, David Miller wrote:
Please, just stop right now.
We're not asking for the a huge patch covering the entire pull
request.
We're asking for you to post a patch series, one per commit, and as
numbered, fresh, new mailing list patch postings. As if you were
submitting these changes for the very first time to the list.
Please ask a colleague for how to do this properly before you spam the
list again with more unnecessary and improperly formatted submissions.
Dave,
He's doing what Linus requested from Mellanox. They were instructed to
identify all of the coming changes in the next release where patches
sent through your tree and patches sent through my tree would have
conflicts. They were then instructed to make git commits that merged
those changes and have both you and I pull them (please note "pull", not
git am patches) so that we have the exact same commit hashes in our
trees and git will do the right thing when your tree and my tree are
merged in the next merge window. As it turns out the conflicts are
mainly in this firmware offset definition file. They just put all of
the needed changes in there in one commit. I doubt they have individual
patches here. This was a custom made patch who's sole purpose is to
combine all the otherwise possibly conflicting changes in one place.
I'm sure they could split it out into different commits, but they
wouldn't be full commits, just the portion that applies to this firmware
file.
--
Doug Ledford [off-list ref]
GPG Key ID: 0E572FDD
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:16 PM, Doug Ledford [off-list ref] wrote:
Dave,
He's doing what Linus requested from Mellanox. They were instructed to
identify all of the coming changes in the next release where patches
sent through your tree and patches sent through my tree would have
conflicts. They were then instructed to make git commits that merged
those changes and have both you and I pull them (please note "pull", not
git am patches) so that we have the exact same commit hashes in our
trees and git will do the right thing when your tree and my tree are
merged in the next merge window. As it turns out the conflicts are
mainly in this firmware offset definition file. They just put all of
the needed changes in there in one commit. I doubt they have individual
patches here.
Doug,
The main comment was that the submission lacked posting of the actual
changes inline as patch/es along with a cover letter that gives the
background plus the URL for git pulling of this. In this case (4.8
shared code), the submission only touches the mlx5_ifc.c FW file and
indeed it makes sense to have only one patch that covers it all, in
prev/future cases we had/would have that in multiple patches.
Leon re-submitted that later today in the proper way
Or.
This was a custom made patch who's sole purpose is to
combine all the otherwise possibly conflicting changes in one place.
I'm sure they could split it out into different commits, but they
wouldn't be full commits, just the portion that applies to this firmware file
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 01:16:50PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
On 6/14/2016 3:02 AM, David Miller wrote:
quoted
Please, just stop right now.
We're not asking for the a huge patch covering the entire pull
request.
We're asking for you to post a patch series, one per commit, and as
numbered, fresh, new mailing list patch postings. As if you were
submitting these changes for the very first time to the list.
Please ask a colleague for how to do this properly before you spam the
list again with more unnecessary and improperly formatted submissions.
Dave,
He's doing what Linus requested from Mellanox. They were instructed to
identify all of the coming changes in the next release where patches
sent through your tree and patches sent through my tree would have
conflicts. They were then instructed to make git commits that merged
those changes and have both you and I pull them (please note "pull", not
git am patches) so that we have the exact same commit hashes in our
trees and git will do the right thing when your tree and my tree are
merged in the next merge window. As it turns out the conflicts are
mainly in this firmware offset definition file. They just put all of
the needed changes in there in one commit. I doubt they have individual
patches here. This was a custom made patch who's sole purpose is to
combine all the otherwise possibly conflicting changes in one place.
I'm sure they could split it out into different commits, but they
wouldn't be full commits, just the portion that applies to this firmware
file.
Thanks Doug,
In addition to your accurate description. We don't have separate commits
for this file (mlx5_ifc.h) for many reasons: auto generated file, one
logical change (enable FW features), no helpful for bisect e.t.c.
My goal was to simplify the maintainers' work by sending minimal
possible pull request with easy for review information.
I also resent the pull request [1] as a cover letter together with patch itself [2].
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1465900500-1578-1-git-send-email-leonro+()+mellanox+!+com
[2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1465900500-1578-2-git-send-email-leonro+()+mellanox+!+com
Thanks.
--
Doug Ledford [off-list ref]
GPG Key ID: 0E572FDD