From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7891EC6786C for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 00:32:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4735F20811 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 00:32:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4735F20811 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=deltatee.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728655AbeLMAcb (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2018 19:32:31 -0500 Received: from ale.deltatee.com ([207.54.116.67]:52088 "EHLO ale.deltatee.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726973AbeLMAca (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2018 19:32:30 -0500 Received: from guinness.priv.deltatee.com ([172.16.1.162]) by ale.deltatee.com with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gXEvU-0002Rv-5d; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:32:29 -0700 To: Jon Mason Cc: wesley.sheng@microchip.com, Kurt Schwemmer , Dave Jiang , Allen Hubbe , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntb@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel , wesleyshenggit@sina.com References: <1544103052-28191-1-git-send-email-wesley.sheng@microchip.com> From: Logan Gunthorpe Message-ID: <391d02f2-b986-83ca-00ae-103fe22de0ef@deltatee.com> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:32:25 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-CA Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 172.16.1.162 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: wesleyshenggit@sina.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntb@googlegroups.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, allenbh@gmail.com, dave.jiang@intel.com, kurt.schwemmer@microsemi.com, wesley.sheng@microchip.com, jdmason@kudzu.us X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: logang@deltatee.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] ntb_hw_switchtec: Added support of >=4G memory windows X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 02 Aug 2016 21:08:31 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on ale.deltatee.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2018-12-12 5:25 p.m., Jon Mason wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 7:01 PM Logan Gunthorpe wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2018-12-12 4:57 p.m., Jon Mason wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 6:42 PM Logan Gunthorpe wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2018-12-12 4:00 p.m., Jon Mason wrote: >>>>> So, you based your patches on a series of patches not in the >>>>> ntb/ntb-next branch? Please don't do this. I see nothing in these >>>>> patches which requires that series, which makes this even more >>>>> unnecessary. Since these are fairly trivial, I'm taking them and >>>>> pushing to the ntb-next branch to give these more time to be tested >>>>> (due to not being tested on the proper branch). I would really >>>>> appreciate you testing the ntb-next branch as a sanity check. >>>> >>>> The NTB test tools don't work with switchtec hardware without that patch >>>> set, so there's no way to test the changes without that branch. >>> >>> Then let's get those patches in. IIRC, I asked you to split up the >>> patch series to be bugfixes and features (or at least reorder the >>> series so I can split it up that way in my branches). Also, I think >>> Serge had some comments that may/may not need to be addressed. Could >>> you please reorder and resend (and Serge can comment as needed on the >>> resend)? >> >> I resent a while back and responded to all the feedback. Every patch in >> that series fixes a bug. None of them add features. > > Per https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/6/12/552, I asked the series be split > up and the comments to be cleaned-up. You repushed without addressing > this (or Serge's comments), which caused me to ignore the series. > Again, I'm happy to take it as a single series and split it up on my > end, I just need the patches reordered to have the bugfixes I > specified in the front to allow for this to be easily done. And what was not clear about my response? https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/6/12/577 That commit is absolutely *not* a feature request. Without it, none of the other fixes will fix anything and are thus worse than useless. I responded to Serge's comments and then responded *again* in the cover letter of v2. What he was asking for was, and still is, physically impossible. Logan