On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 01:28:18PM -0400, Martin K . Petersen wrote:
> However, having a bazillion identical commit messages is also really
> annoying. So for automated changes like this, I'd rather just have a
> single patch.
Thought so ;-)
--
Johannes Thumshirn
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 01:28:18PM -0400, Martin K . Petersen wrote:
> However, having a bazillion identical commit messages is also really
> annoying. So for automated changes like this, I'd rather just have a
> single patch.
Thought so ;-)
--
Johannes Thumshirn
Johannes,
> Ultimately it's up to Martin and James but I don't see a hughe benefit
> in having it all in a separate patch.
Generally speaking, I prefer driver maintainers to be able to sign off
on changes to their code. So I tend to lean towards a per-driver
grouping.
However, having a
Johannes,
> Ultimately it's up to Martin and James but I don't see a hughe benefit
> in having it all in a separate patch.
Generally speaking, I prefer driver maintainers to be able to sign off
on changes to their code. So I tend to lean towards a per-driver
grouping.
However, having a
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 02:23:11PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote:
> Yes, We can add all of them in single patch. But other maintainer wants
> single single patch. thats why I have send 29 patch. :(
Ultimately it's up to Martin and James but I don't see a hughe benefit in
having it all in a separate
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 02:23:11PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote:
> Yes, We can add all of them in single patch. But other maintainer wants
> single single patch. thats why I have send 29 patch. :(
Ultimately it's up to Martin and James but I don't see a hughe benefit in
having it all in a separate
On Monday 31 July 2017 01:26 PM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 02:07:09PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote:
pci_device_id are not supposed to change at runtime. All functions
working with pci_device_id provided by work with
const pci_device_id. So mark the non-const structs as
On Monday 31 July 2017 01:26 PM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 02:07:09PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote:
pci_device_id are not supposed to change at runtime. All functions
working with pci_device_id provided by work with
const pci_device_id. So mark the non-const structs as
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 02:07:09PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote:
> pci_device_id are not supposed to change at runtime. All functions
> working with pci_device_id provided by work with
> const pci_device_id. So mark the non-const structs as const.
Can't this go all in one patch instead of
On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 02:07:09PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote:
> pci_device_id are not supposed to change at runtime. All functions
> working with pci_device_id provided by work with
> const pci_device_id. So mark the non-const structs as const.
Can't this go all in one patch instead of
pci_device_id are not supposed to change at runtime. All functions
working with pci_device_id provided by work with
const pci_device_id. So mark the non-const structs as const.
Arvind Yadav (29):
[PATCH 01/29] scsi: qla1280: constify pci_device_id.
[PATCH 02/29] scsi: qedi: constify
pci_device_id are not supposed to change at runtime. All functions
working with pci_device_id provided by work with
const pci_device_id. So mark the non-const structs as const.
Arvind Yadav (29):
[PATCH 01/29] scsi: qla1280: constify pci_device_id.
[PATCH 02/29] scsi: qedi: constify
12 matches
Mail list logo
