On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:50:30PM +0100, Christoph Badura wrote:
>
> If you hadn't reversed the order of
>
> tftproot_dhcpboot()
> if (md_is_root) ...
> rootspec = bootspec
>
> that would wouldn't have need fixing because tftproot_dhcpboot() sets
> md_is_root.
It needed fixing because:
- md0 doesn't exist before it is opened for the first time.
- that's one reason why setting rootspec didn't work as intendend
> Why was the order reversed anyway? Can you please explain?
It's not about the order but about separating different cases.
The setroot code is riddled with side effects.
> Can you also please respond to the review remarks?
I asked you for a review, it never appeared.
> And what about the timing? Can you please explain what exactly the
> idea was to jump in, make these changes, and rush in after you noticed
> someone else was working on that code? That seemed pretty rude to me.
> These changes don't look like they were particularly urgent.
>
> I ask you to kindly refrain from making uncoordinated changes to code that
> other people are working on.
I am working on this since a few months and committed it now before the branch
to -9 after asking (several times) for a review.
Greetings,
--
Michael van Elst
Internet: mlel...@serpens.de
"A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
