Hi,
On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 17:13 +0200, Mylene Josserand wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> > On 05/13/2015 01:10 PM, Tomasz Bursztyka wrote:
> >> Hi Mylene,
> >>
> >>> I understand and see (in outline) how adapt the code.
> >>> Thank you for the tips, it will help me a lot if the Frederik solution's
> >>> did not
> >>> work for me.
> >>
> >> Looks like Frederik's solution works with either context A or context B,
> >> not
> >> both at same time.
> >>
> >> Anyway, if you get a patch that works, you will be welcomed to send it on
> >> this
> >> ML.
> >
> > Okay, I will let you know if I managed to get it work.
> >
>
>
> Sorry for my (very) late answer.
We're fine with a bit longer real world schedules, no worries here.
> I have managed to handle two (or more) internet contexts at the same
> time, 2-3 days after my last post but I was busy so I did not have
> time to send a patch.
>
> I have implemented it (and tested it) with version 1.29. I am
> currently merging it to the last version of connman.
>
> There are many modifications and I do not really know how I should
> categorize them into patches series. As I removed the "network"
> property in modem_data and added it into context_data, there are many
> functions that are impacted.
Ideally it should be be possible to present this kind of major
structural change with moving data from one structure to another by
creating a bigger patch that does only that with no loss of
functionality. Out of necessity this patch then touches quite many
places at the same time. Ideally the next (or previous) patch(es) in the
series would then add the desired feature change(s). But as you propose
below,...
> If it is okay for you, I thought I could send one patch with all
> modifications and if there is a way to categorize, you could report it
> to me.
...you can also send one big patch where we can help you categorizing
and splitting up the functionality into smaller patches. To help us
remember this still next week, add 'RFC' to the patch subject and write
the commit or cover letter message to indicate that you are asking for
input in splitting up this patch.
> I tried to follow the coding style and I checked the code with
> checkpatch.pl script from Linux kernel. I hope it will be okay.
Kernel coding style is mostly ok, we'll do any additional nitpicking
after or during split up. I'd concentrate more on the patch splitting
first with nitpicking later. Causes one more round, but is probably less
confusing this way.
> I will send the patch in next few days. It will be the first version
> so do not hesitate for any comments. I would send a version 2 with
> pleasure.
Thanks!
Patrik
_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
connman@connman.net
https://lists.connman.net/mailman/listinfo/connman
