On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 04:13:22PM +1000, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
> This change was part of another patch that you reviewed. This small
> change got left out when I merged my changes in with your inode
> allocation cleanup which you asked me to do.
Yes, I did ask for you to do that and I kinda expected to see the
result for review again after that. I did not review the changes
that were committed.
A second review would have caught the bug you introduced by
integrating the bug fix into my patch as I would have suggested that
you keep the enhancment and the bug fix as two separare commits.
Then the commit logs that would have a 'use init_once' commit and a
'deadlock + memory leak fix' commit....
> I also had to modify
> your original patch because it did not apply cleanly due other changes
> that you made (the semaphore completion stuff).
You could have asked for an updated patch when you found it
didn't apply. I had one ready to go and ended up posting
it twice before your commit...
> I didn't have to take
> your cleanup patch - I could have just fixed the bug.
Your choice, but either way I kind of expect some kind of dialogue
when changes are neceessary. It only takes a few seconds to send a
'doesn't apply - can you update/going with original bugfix'