On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 08:50:55PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:57:06AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:24:17AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:26:59PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:32:48PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 08:50:55PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:57:06AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:24:17AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 09:57:06PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
I tried to apply the 3rd, but it didn't apply due to patches I applied
in your first set of 4 patches.
Does that help?
Yes, thanks. I've resent the patchset yesterday as v3:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/27/805
It
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 01:58:01PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 09:38:46PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
Avoid magic number and use a comparison with a defined value instead
that checks whether module param has been set by the user to some
value at loading time.
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:26:59PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 01:58:01PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 09:38:46PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
Avoid magic number and use a comparison with a defined value instead
that checks whether
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 05:14:06PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:57:06AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
And the reason I got confused was because you didn't label your second
set of patches v2, which it was, I saw two separate series, one with a
few patches, and
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:57:06AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:24:17AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:26:59PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 01:58:01PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 08:50:55PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
And the reason I got confused was because you didn't label your second
set of patches v2, which it was, I saw two separate series, one with a
few patches, and then 2 sets of 9, the second set labeled v2 so I
thought they were
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote:
Mariusz, for people who have to parse hundreds to thousands of e-mails
a day, dealing with non-trivial operation modes like this is never easy.
I think (I'll let Greg suggest what he prefers) that the most reliable
thing to do
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 09:38:46PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
Avoid magic number and use a comparison with a defined value instead
that checks whether module param has been set by the user to some
value at loading time.
Signed-off-by: Mariusz Gorski marius.gor...@gmail.com
Acked-by: Willy
Avoid magic number and use a comparison with a defined value instead
that checks whether module param has been set by the user to some
value at loading time.
Signed-off-by: Mariusz Gorski marius.gor...@gmail.com
---
v2: Don't introduce new macros for param value check
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 09:38:46PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
Avoid magic number and use a comparison with a defined value instead
that checks whether module param has been set by the user to some
value at loading time.
Signed-off-by: Mariusz Gorski marius.gor...@gmail.com
Acked-by: Willy
12 matches
Mail list logo
