From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f70.google.com (mail-it0-f70.google.com [209.85.214.70]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10A71280245 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 14:24:02 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-it0-f70.google.com with SMTP id b11so5254838itj.0 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:24:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from userp2130.oracle.com (userp2130.oracle.com. [156.151.31.86]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 8si687819ior.161.2018.01.24.11.24.00 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:24:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Patch Submission process and Handling Internal Conflict References: <1516820744.3073.30.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: Mike Kravetz Message-ID: Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:20:13 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1516820744.3073.30.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: James Bottomley , linux-fsdevel , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-scsi Cc: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org On 01/24/2018 11:05 AM, James Bottomley wrote: > I've got two community style topics, which should probably be discussed > in the plenary > > 1. Patch Submission Process > > Today we don't have a uniform patch submission process across Storage, > Filesystems and MM. The question is should we (or at least should we > adhere to some minimal standards). The standard we've been trying to > hold to in SCSI is one review per accepted non-trivial patch. For us, > it's useful because it encourages driver writers to review each other's > patches rather than just posting and then complaining their patch > hasn't gone in. I can certainly think of a couple of bugs I've had to > chase in mm where the underlying patches would have benefited from > review, so I'd like to discuss making the one review per non-trival > patch our base minimum standard across the whole of LSF/MM; it would > certainly serve to improve our Reviewed-by statistics. Well, the mm track at least has some discussion of this last year: https://lwn.net/Articles/718212/ -- Mike Kravetz -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org