From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9729C48BE6 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 02:46:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6232608FC for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 02:46:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230291AbhFOCsj (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jun 2021 22:48:39 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:47738 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230190AbhFOCsh (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jun 2021 22:48:37 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 35A78613B6; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 01:07:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1623719228; bh=rG3719QpCm03Pct6ZPmHY7NKA0ZnZcb/msTIuT6DEZo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=eZANhhaATJcoaqqX0CoZzMiB5xCfNlYG9Su3V18leTk1kBzL+YIkFqHlxg/UX47Ec nThGgd50wdgXkXS9MLOBIdYfmlZgT7VWzuhOZMWPDnMtb2Ywfxy1uVvuUJINMWiF2+ gdzUpU6w6uD2uzM6UDARM48ODr7UcAhW6S9+huTM= Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 18:07:06 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Yury Norov , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux-Arch , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Yoshinori Sato , Brian Cain , Geert Uytterhoeven , Thomas Bogendoerfer , Jonas Bonn , Stefan Kristiansson , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Palmer Dabbelt , Heiko Carstens , Rich Felker , David Hildenbrand , Jaegeuk Kim , Arnd Bergmann , Andy Shevchenko , Rasmus Villemoes , Alexander Lobakin , Samuel Mendoza-Jonas , Jakub Kicinski , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , Alexey Klimov , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] all: replace find_next{,_zero}_bit with find_first{,_zero}_bit where appropriate Message-Id: <20210614180706.1e8564854bfed648dd4c039b@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20210612123639.329047-1-yury.norov@gmail.com> <20210612123639.329047-8-yury.norov@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 12:41:38 +0300 Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sunday, June 13, 2021, Yury Norov wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 12:47:31AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 3:39 PM Yury Norov wrote: > > > > > > > > find_first{,_zero}_bit is a more effective analogue of 'next' version > > if > > > > start == 0. This patch replaces 'next' with 'first' where things look > > > > trivial. > > > > > > Depending on the maintainers (but I think there will be at least few > > > in this case) they would like to have this be split on a per-driver > > > basis. > > > I counted 17 patches. I would split. > > > > > > Since many of them are independent you may send without Cc'ing all > > > non-relevant people in each case. > > > > submitting-patches.rst says: > > > > On the other hand, if you make a single change to numerous files, > > group those changes into a single patch. Thus a single logical > > change > > is contained within a single patch. > > > > Also refer 96d4f267e40f9 ("Remove 'type' argument from access_ok() > > functioin.") > > > Mixing arch and non arch is not good, fs stuff can be separated as well, > so, at least 4 patches. Otherwise it might be not good for bissection / > reverting. Actually I don't have a problem taking/merging splatterpatches like this one, as long as all relevant maintainers are cc'ed throughout. If they review/test/ack then great. If they don't then their stuff breaks during -rc and they get to fix it (this almost never happens anyway). If the splatterpatch is prepared as a series of patches then that's OK as well. I'll queue them all up behind linux-next so I can see when maintainers have merged them and drop the individual patches as/when needed. On balance... I guess individual patches is a bit better because the more diligent maintainers will sometimes merge them and get them better tested. But in practice, 95% of maintainers will eyeball it, say "yeah fine" and let Andrew handle it.