From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752749Ab3LXPFX (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:05:23 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0149.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.149]:59506 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752301Ab3LXPFV (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:05:21 -0500 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:152:355:379:541:599:973:982:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1541:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2559:2562:2687:2911:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3353:3622:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3871:3872:3873:3874:4321:4425:5007:7652:7903:10004:10400:10481:10848:11026:11232:11658:11783:11914:12295:12438:12517:12519:12740:13069:13311:13357:13894:19900,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: cake59_4b70999a21556 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2717 Message-ID: <1387897517.2259.41.camel@joe-AO722> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/20] net: slight optimization of addr compare for some modules From: Joe Perches To: Ding Tianhong Cc: Ding Tianhong , "David S. Miller" , Netdev , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 07:05:17 -0800 In-Reply-To: <52B99BB9.9030201@gmail.com> References: <52B96F9B.4020806@huawei.com> <1387894944.2259.31.camel@joe-AO722> <52B99BB9.9030201@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 22:35 +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: > 于 2013/12/24 22:22, Joe Perches 写道: > > On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 19:27 +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: > >> Use possibly more efficient ether_addr_equal_unaligned > >> and ether_addr_equal to instead of memcmp. > > > > A negative of adding so many different drivers in a single > > patch is that you miss sending patches to the named maintainers. > > > > Most of these below have separate individual maintainers. > > you mean that I should send below by separate patch? I think yes, You can send them to netdev, but cc'ing the named maintainers is a polite thing to do. Sending individual patches can make it easier for maintainers to review the bits that are specific to their projects without having to wade through other changes that aren't relevant to them. > It seemed that I > misunderstood, I use the ./script/getmainter and found the only maintainer > is David, and others are support, so maybe I was wrong, but it really a big > patchset, could I send them by seperate patchset? I think it could be more > clearly. >>From the MAINTAINERS file: S: Status, one of the following: Supported: Someone is actually paid to look after this. Maintained: Someone actually looks after it. Odd Fixes: It has a maintainer but they don't have time to do much other than throw the odd patch in. See below.. Orphan: No current maintainer [but maybe you could take the role as you write your new code]. Obsolete: Old code. Something tagged obsolete generally means it has been replaced by a better system and you should be using that. So "supported" is "higher/better" than "maintained".