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:0.844 / U:0.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site