On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 13:06 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> v1: https://lwn.net/Articles/481612/
> v2: https://lwn.net/Articles/496586/
> v3: Didn't release it to linux-mtd
> v4: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1297626
> v5: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1298488
> v6: https://lwn.net/Articles/498041/

Hi Richard,

while my daughters are sleeping, I have a chance to quickly review the
code. I just start from the attaching path and add TODOs.

Can we change our workflow a bit. I will create a branch for fastmap in
the UBI tree taking v7 as the base. I'll add my TODOs there and commit,
and send them also as a patch to the mailing list. You then send
incremental patches which fix TODOs or anything else.

We can discuss my notes and if some of them make no sens - the patch
would just kill the TODO.

In any case, I feel a need to switch to incremental development and get
incremental patches instead of code drops. You can send entire fastmap
work to the list from time to time, of course, for people to look.

How does this sound?

Also, I'd like you to document the tests you do. I'd like to start
making sure that we never break anything.

We can start with the UBI tests from the mtd-utils plust the integck
test. And whatever goes to my branch should never break them. Do these
tests pass now? If not, let's make them pass.

How does this sound to you?

At some later points we'll start to move pieces to the master branch.

Shmulik, is it fine with you?

I'll publush the 'fastmap' branch a bit later and send you the patch
with my TODO comments, if this is fine.

Thanks!
-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy