From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752477AbdGSFsp (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 01:48:45 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:13238 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751228AbdGSFso (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 01:48:44 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,379,1496127600"; d="scan'208";a="1174236503" From: Alexander Shishkin To: Alexey Budankov , 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 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4]: perf/core: complete replace of lists by rb trees for pinned and flexible groups at perf_event_context In-Reply-To: <76ee4e22-a118-3f57-ce56-ad9fd35b6326@linux.intel.com> 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> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.23.7 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 08:48:39 +0300 Message-ID: <87k235ugco.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 Regards, -- Alex