On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Saeed Mahameed <sae...@dev.mellanox.co.il> wrote:
> Why would you break down this patch to many when no matter what you > do, at the end it would look the same ? > As Leon mentioned we MLNX maintainers prefer to update this file at > once when possible. See my response to Leon. It happened to me many times in code review that people gave me patches that open X fields in the IFC file and their code used Y << X fields. I don't want the IFC file to have even one unused field, and I think the correct way to do that is have both the IFC file and the driver changes in the same series. I understand the trend to have zero-conflicts, lets try that. Did you make sure all exposed IFC fields are used? Or.
