[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v3 05/16] block: Kill bi_destructor
- From: Tejun Heo <tj kernel org>
- To: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet google com>
- Cc: axboe kernel dk, yehuda hq newdream net, dm-devel redhat com, linux-kernel vger kernel org, linux-bcache vger kernel org, mpatocka redhat com, vgoyal redhat com, bharrosh panasas com, linux-fsdevel vger kernel org, sage newdream net, agk redhat com, drbd-dev lists linbit com
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v3 05/16] block: Kill bi_destructor
- Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 11:20:25 +0900
Hello, Kent.
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:10:42PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> Heh. Well, in my view deleting stuff is good by default, and if you can
> delete things without user visible effects and without making the code
> more complicated...
>
> So I guess given the simplicity of this particular patch in the series
> I'm not sure what there is to justify here. Any suggestions on what
> would make sense to put in...?
So, what I would prefer to see is the justification of the whole
changes somewhere in the patch stream, so that patches can do,n
patch 1: update X to not use bi_destructor which will soon be removed.
patch 2: ditto for Y
...
patch N: bi_destructor is stupid because blah blah and after preceding
changes is no longer used. Kill it.
so that when one sees a patch in the series and wonders why the change
is being made, [s]he can follow the patch stream and understand.
Thanks.
--
tejun
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]