Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] xen-pciback: clean up {bar, rom}_init() | From | David Vrabel <> | Date | Wed, 29 Jun 2016 13:42:33 +0100 |
| |
On 27/06/16 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 24.06.16 at 17:01, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote: >> On 07/06/16 07:31, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> - drop unused function parameter of read_dev_bar() >>> - drop rom_init() (now identical to bar_init()) >>> - fold read_dev_bar() into its now single caller >>> - simplify determination of 64-bit memory resource >>> - use const and unsigned >> >> Please split this in 5 separate patches for easier review. >> >> Especially as often anyone writing "simplify" means "accidentally break". > > So this is directly opposite of what Boris had asked for - originally > there were two patches, which I folded upon his request (and > which he gave his R-b for already). May I ask the two of you to > first settle on a consistent set of expectations to patches like this?
SubmittingPatches section 3 is clear on what is required.
If your commit message is a list of bullet points it's a pretty big hint that none of the changes are related.
David
| |