> > 
> > Ok, patch 7-9 of this series do not depend on this patch nor number 6.  I 
> > will
> > resend those 3 while I figure out what to do about these 2:
> > 
> > staging/rdma/hfi1: Add function stubs for TID caching
> > staging/rdma/hfi1: Implement Expected Receive TID caching
> > 
> > Frankly this was an attempt to reduce the size of "Implement Expected 
> > Receive
> > TID caching".  I obviously did something wrong.
> > 
> > I really don't know that I can split these up any more without causing 
> > issues
> > with bisecting the code.
> 
> I strongly doubt that you created this new feature all "at once", it
> took a set of steps to get to your final destination.  So show that
> work, like your math professor told you...
> 

The original author and I have been going through the code to see what we can
do.  We have identified a couple of other pieces which can be split.

One question.  Is it ok to have functionality which is added which is unused in
a preliminary patch?  I believe this is ok as long as the code compiles but I
just wanted to make sure.  While there are different operations added in this
patch it is broken to not use them as a set.  So we need to have a series which
implement the pieces with a final patch which exposes the set of operations.

Is this acceptable?

Ira

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Reply via email to