Re: recovery from fail
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 23:10:39 +, Andrey Utkin said: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:29:04PM +1100, Tobin Harding wrote: > > I don't want to make any more noise than I already have > > Not a big deal. > Don't worry about that unless you repeatedly receive strong suggestions > to never submit anything again. Don't worry too much, I've been around since 2.5.47 (late 2002), and out of the thousands of people contributing to the kernel, we've have exactly *one* person like that. (We've had a number of people who we've suggested get a bit more competent at C programming, but we're more than happy to hear from those people after they've spent a few more months doing C coding... > > but I also don't want to ignore the reviewer by not implementing the > > suggested changes. > > > > Is it rude to reply to the original review email for further > > discussion having already botched the patch? > > If you can fix issues on your own, just submit v3 and add all previous > reviewers to recipients list. Note that many subsystem maintainers will get irritated if you submit a v3 that *doesn't* fix all the issues identified so far - so stash all the comments on the v2 patchset in a mail folder, and before you send v3, go through and make sure you've done *something* about all the comments. > If you can't fix issues, proceed discussion with reviewer in whatever > way you find suitable. And keep in mind that some reviewers are merely seeking explanations because they don't spend a lot of time in the relevant part of the kernel. I've been known to comment om patches with questions like "Did you consider the effect of XYZ?" and a reply of "Yeah we thought about it, and it's not an issue because ABC" is all that's needed... pgpGRjCEsLZ3l.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Re: recovery from fail
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:29:04PM +1100, Tobin Harding wrote: > I have made and epic fail and am asking for advice on how to proceed > to cause the least amount of upset. > > I submitted a simple patch series to LKML. A reviewer made a > suggestion. I submitted v2 - without building it :( > > kbuild test robot picked up that it doesn't compile. The problem is > that I now cannot get the second patch of the series to compile. > > What is the correct protocol to follow? Fix issues and carefully submit v3 with proper list of changes since previous submissions. > > I don't want to make any more noise than I already have Not a big deal. Don't worry about that unless you repeatedly receive strong suggestions to never submit anything again. > but I also don't want to ignore the reviewer by not implementing the > suggested changes. > > Is it rude to reply to the original review email for further > discussion having already botched the patch? If you can fix issues on your own, just submit v3 and add all previous reviewers to recipients list. If you can't fix issues, proceed discussion with reviewer in whatever way you find suitable. ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
recovery from fail
I have made and epic fail and am asking for advice on how to proceed to cause the least amount of upset. I submitted a simple patch series to LKML. A reviewer made a suggestion. I submitted v2 - without building it :( kbuild test robot picked up that it doesn't compile. The problem is that I now cannot get the second patch of the series to compile. What is the correct protocol to follow? I don't want to make any more noise than I already have but I also don't want to ignore the reviewer by not implementing the suggested changes. Is it rude to reply to the original review email for further discussion having already botched the patch? Thanks in advance, Tobin. ___ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
