[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5457A560.2020304@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 16:55:12 +0100
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
CC: Ursula Braun <ursula.braun@...ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Frank Blaschka <blaschka@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux390@...ibm.com, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
trivial@...nel.org, Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: s390/net: Deletion of unnecessary checks before two function
calls
> This one is buggy.
I am still interested to clarify this opinion a bit more.
> I'm sorry, but please stop sending these.
I am going to improve more implementation details in affected source files.
> But for this one:
> 1) I don't know what the functions do so I have to look at the code.
I hope that static source code analysis can help here.
> 2) It's in a arch that I don't compile so cscope isn't set up meaning
> it's hard to find the functions.
Do you find the Coccinelle software also useful for your area?
> You're sending a lot of patches and they are all hard to review and some
> of them are buggy and none of them really add any value.
Thanks for your feedback.
The suggested source code clean-up might result in a measurable effect
depending on the call frequency for the changed functions.
Can I help you in any ways to make corresponding review easier?
> It's a waste of your time and it's a waste of my time.
It can be your choice to reject my update suggestion.
Regards,
Markus
--
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