Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8723au: rtw_sta_mgt: change rtw_alloc_stainfo23a to use gfp_t instead if int

[Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>]

Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> writes:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 12:49:03PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> You should be running your tools against the staging tree automatically,
>> that way you catch it before it hits the mainline tree.
>>
>> Just flooding mailing lists for the sake of flooding them doesn't add
>> any value either.
>
> We are used to handling the traffic.  Heh.  Don't worry about us.  ;)

I know how the traffic works, and I know I don't particularly like
flooding that I don't need to receive. I'll add
devel@driverdev.osuosl.org to the CC list next time.

> I don't actually run static analysis on staging patches until they hit
> linux-next, I only review the mailing list patches manually.  My review
> process is built around mailing lists so creating a special process for
> rtl8723au makes my life harder instead of easier.  Every subsystem has a
> review process, it's not that we are treating you unfairly by asking you
> to send your patches for review.

I am not suggesting you do it for the rtl8723au driver, I suggest you do
it as a general thing. I don't read devel@driverdev.osuosl.org either,
and like many other developers, I mostly gave up on lkml as well.

> Btw, Greg doesn't rebase the staging tree so, once a patch is merged,
> then it means it will hit mainline.  At that point, it is too late to
> send a second version of the patch.

I know, but I also know that I am not going to rebase my tree and
resubmit the full set, unless there is a strong reason for doing so.
As long as something sits in staging it's not really a showstopper if a
minor issue slips past and gets fixed up in a follow-on commit.

Jes