Re: [PATCH v2] IB/ocrdma_hw: remove unnecessary code in ocrdma_mbx_dealloc_lkey

[Leon Romanovsky]

On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 02:16:25PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>
> Quoting Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 08:56:37AM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > >
> > > Quoting Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 08:45:17AM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > > > > Check on return value and goto label mbx_err are unnecessary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1268780
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Yuval Shaia <yuval.shaia@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > >  Remove assignment from "int status = -ENOMEM" as suggested by Leon
> > > > > Romanovsky.
> > > > >
> > > > >  drivers/infiniband/hw/ocrdma/ocrdma_hw.c | 6 ++----
> > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > Please use git send-email to send patches and not reply to the
> > > conversation.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm using mutt.
> > > What would be the advantage of using git send-email in this case?
> >
> > New mail headers, so it won't appear as Reply-To and will be presented
> > correctly in mutt's threaded mode.
> >
>
> Oh I actually did that on purpose.
>
> So the preferred way to do this is to send the vN of the patch as a reply to
> the first patch?
> or as a new thread?

As a new thread, please. It gives numerous advantages: nice view in mutt,
easy followed links in web archives and maintainer's acceptance email as
a response to actual vN patch and not to initial patch.

Thanks

>
> Thanks
> --
> Gustavo A. R. Silva
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature