On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 2:24 PM Vineet Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 9/16/26 2:02 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Tue Sep 15, 2026 at 1:17 AM UTC, Vineet Gupta wrote: > >> Back when I started, keeping it NFC made more sense. But with all the > >> nuances discovered in the process, I'm inclined to drop the NFC stance > > What is NFC ? > > non functional change aka refactoring. > Like I said when I started I wanted to keep the id / flag breakout > purely non functional. But given that splitting it does change one thing > (mentioned below) - I'm dropping NFC attribution. > > >> and make functional changes - there's at least one which is the > >> following accepted pre-series and now rejected. > >> > >> old {r2.id=A+delta32} vs cur {r2.id=B+delta64} > > that's a red flag, no? The refactoring patch shouldn't have > > any changes to selftest and veristat numbers? > > Unless I'm missing it again. > > Yes understood except that it is no longer refactoring.
NFC is gcc probably lingvo? In kernel people just put in the commit log "No functional changes", so it's easier for humans and for AI to review patches. So pls skip such unusual tags in the future, but keep the first patch as "No functional change".
