From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753247AbdGSHyH (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 03:54:07 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:50869 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752760AbdGSHyG (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 03:54:06 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,380,1496127600"; d="scan'208";a="994616320" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4]: perf/core: complete replace of lists by rb trees for pinned and flexible groups at perf_event_context To: Alexander Shishkin , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Andi Kleen , Kan Liang , Dmitri Prokhorov , Valery Cherepennikov , Mark Rutland , David Carrillo-Cisneros , Stephane Eranian , linux-kernel References: <33f0e89c-9252-c154-cd11-5f4dd06bdb3a@linux.intel.com> <87h8yavv20.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> <87vampvo82.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> <43f69bfc-25b4-9bee-5b25-90d73ec61041@linux.intel.com> <87shhtvl2y.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> <87mv81vg4h.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> <76ee4e22-a118-3f57-ce56-ad9fd35b6326@linux.intel.com> <87k235ugco.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> From: Alexey Budankov Organization: Intel Corp. Message-ID: <18608081-98df-77bb-4163-f3e2d0dae3d3@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:53:51 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87k235ugco.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 19.07.2017 8:48, Alexander Shishkin wrote: > Alexey Budankov writes: > >> On 18.07.2017 19:55, Alexander Shishkin wrote: >>> Alexey Budankov writes: >>> >>>> I see. Do you personally have some more issues that needs to be addressed? >>>> My intention is that this patch v5 4/4 addresses all your comments raised in >>>> the previous reviews. >>> >>> I don't know yet, I haven't started on the actual content of the >>> patchset, it being hard to read. I'm going to wait for more readable >>> versions to look at the actual code. >> >> Is the whole final change attached to this patch v5 4/4 sufficient for you to proceed? > > No. As I've said yesterday here [1] and here [2], patches have to make > sense on their own. I'm sure 'submitting-patches' also has something to > that effect. > >> If not - please suggest the form which is more convenient for you. > > I've also answered this already in [3]: > >> Well, normally you'd be sending new versions of your patchset until the >> maintainers are happy with it, at which point they'd pick it up. New >> versions would address the issues pointed out during the review, also >> keeping in mind the what 'submitting-patches' says about submitting >> patches. > > [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150038199212005 > [2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150039142715304 > [3] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150039054614993 Well, ok. I see you point. Do you want me to restructure the whole patchset or clarify more on some parts of the current set? > > Regards, > -- > Alex > Thanks, Alexey