[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100303164202.3e5b7435.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 16:42:02 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, roland@...hat.com,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, hjl.tools@...il.com,
Linus <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next requirements
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 01:35:43 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> As a side note: We created checkpatch.pl, to have a tool which helps
> us to alert developers about stuff which is deprecated and as a
> byproduct the coding style rules. I think it's a useful tool in
> general, just the outcome is an utter trainwreck:
>
> We have hordes of whitespace, spelling and codingstyle cleanup
> maniacs, while the hard stuff of replacing deprecated interfaces like
> semaphore based mutexes / completions, cleaning up the BKL horror,
> etc. is left to a few already overworked people who care.
>
> What's even worse is it that developers of new code and the
> maintainers who are merging it simply ignore its existance for
> whatever reasons. I can accept the whitespace argument, but I have no
> grasp why deprecation warnings are ignored at will.
um, write checkpatch rules to detect new additions of deprecated features.
I take patches.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists