From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: tomoya-linux@dsn.okisemi.com
Cc: wg@grandegger.com, w.sang@pengutronix.de, chripell@fsfe.org,
21cnbao@gmail.com, sameo@linux.intel.com,
socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qi.wang@intel.com,
yong.y.wang@intel.com, andrew.chih.howe.khor@intel.com,
joel.clark@intel.com, kok.howg.ewe@intel.com,
masa-korg@dsn.okisemi.com, margie.foster@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 v4] can: Topcliff: PCH_CAN driver: Add Flow control/Fix Endianess issue/Separate IF register/Enumerate LEC macro/Move MSI processing/Use BIT(X)/Change Message Object index/Add prefix PCH_
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 09:14:43 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101116.091443.226753420.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CE275A4.9010400@dsn.okisemi.com>
Way too many changes in one patch.
Please post one that fixes the endianness issues.
One that fixes the register interface seperation.
One that adds flow control processing.
etc.
When you combine many tasks into one patch it's impossible
to bisect through your changes to debug problems in order
to figure out which changed introduced a bug.
I am not applying this, and I will not apply your patches
until you split them up properly.
You may think that there is zero value in this, but there
is huge value in it for anyone who tries to debug your
changes in the future. Right now you are making that a
nearly impossible task.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-16 17:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-16 12:14 Tomoya MORINAGA
2010-11-16 12:22 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2010-11-16 17:14 ` David Miller [this message]
2010-11-16 20:39 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2010-11-16 20:43 ` David Miller
2010-11-16 21:07 ` Wolfram Sang
2010-11-16 21:10 ` David Miller
2010-11-17 3:00 ` Tomoya MORINAGA
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101116.091443.226753420.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=21cnbao@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew.chih.howe.khor@intel.com \
--cc=chripell@fsfe.org \
--cc=joel.clark@intel.com \
--cc=kok.howg.ewe@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=margie.foster@intel.com \
--cc=masa-korg@dsn.okisemi.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qi.wang@intel.com \
--cc=sameo@linux.intel.com \
--cc=socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de \
--cc=tomoya-linux@dsn.okisemi.com \
--cc=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
--cc=wg@grandegger.com \
--cc=yong.y.wang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome