lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: IB/core: Fine-tuning for ib_is_udata_cleared()
    From
    Date
    >>> Don't introduce a defect in patch 1 and correct
    >>> that introduced defect in patch 2.
    >> Which detail do you not like here?
    >
    > See above.

    This feedback is not clearer.

    I find that the two update steps should work in principle,
    shouldn't they?

    I guess that we have got different preferences for the shown
    patch granularity. Another update variant can follow a bit later
    with the changes squashed together.

    Regards,
    Markus

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2016-09-17 09:57    [W:4.260 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site