From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161103AbWF0P1d (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:27:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161102AbWF0P1c (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:27:32 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.150]:30856 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161097AbWF0P1b (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:27:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:26:33 -0500 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" To: Kirill Korotaev Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , Andrey Savochkin , dlezcano@fr.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, serue@us.ibm.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com, clg@fr.ibm.com, Andrew Morton , herbert@13thfloor.at, devel@openvz.org, sam@vilain.net, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [RFC][patch 1/4] Network namespaces: cleanup of dev_base list use Message-ID: <20060627152633.GF24045@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> References: <20060626134945.A28942@castle.nmd.msu.ru> <44A0D755.5090204@sw.ru> <44A149F5.2060204@sw.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44A149F5.2060204@sw.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting Kirill Korotaev (dev@sw.ru): > >>>>Cleanup of dev_base list use, with the aim to make device list > >>>>per-namespace. > >>>>In almost every occasion, use of dev_base variable and dev->next pointer > >>>>could be easily replaced by for_each_netdev loop. > >>>>A few most complicated places were converted to using > >>>>first_netdev()/next_netdev(). > >>> > >>>As a proof of concept patch this is ok. > >>>As a real world patch this is much too big, which prevents review. > >>>Plus it takes a few actions that are more than replace just > >>>iterators through the device list. > >> > >>Mmm, actually it is a whole changeset and should go as a one patch. I > >>didn't > >>find it to be big and my review took only 5-10mins.. > >>I also don't think that mailing each driver maintainer is a good idea. > >>Only if we want to make some buzz :) > > > > > >Thanks for supporting my case. You reviewed it and missed the obvious > >typo. > >I do agree that a patchset doing it all should happen at once. > This doesn't support anything. e.g. I caught quite a lot of bugs after > Ingo Molnar, but this doesn't make his code "poor". People are people. Exactly - people are people, and they will do a better review of a well-constructed set of small patches than of one large patch. Eyes glaze over, it just happens. -serge