[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1609122311040.3549@hadrien>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 23:11:46 +0200 (CEST)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
cc: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, joe@...ches.com,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
Tatyana Nikolova <tatyana.e.nikolova@...el.com>,
Shiraz Saleem <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>,
Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@...el.com>,
Chien Tin Tung <chien.tin.tung@...el.com>,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/26] constify local structures
On Mon, 12 Sep 2016, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 04:43:58PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:54:07AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 03:05:42PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > >> > > Constify local structures.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
> > >> > > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> > >> >
> > >> > Just my two cents but:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1. You *can* use a static analysis too to find bugs or other issues.
> > >> > 2. However, you should manually do the commits and proper commit
> > >> > messages to subsystems based on your findings. And I generally think
> > >> > that if one contributes code one should also at least smoke test changes
> > >> > somehow.
> > >> >
> > >> > I don't know if I'm alone with my opinion. I just think that one should
> > >> > also do the analysis part and not blindly create and submit patches.
> > >>
> > >> All of the patches are compile tested. And the individual patches are
> > >
> > > Compile-testing is not testing. If you are not able to test a commit,
> > > you should explain why.
> >
> > Dude, Julia has been doing semantic patching for years already and
> > nobody has raised any concerns so far. There's already an expectation
> > that Coccinelle *works* and Julia's sematic patches are sound.
> >
> > Besides, adding 'const' is something that causes virtually no functional
> > changes to the point that build-testing is really all you need. Any
> > problems caused by adding 'const' to a definition will be seen by build
> > errors or warnings.
> >
> > Really, just stop with the pointless discussion and go read a bit about
> > Coccinelle and what semantic patches are giving you. The work done by
> > Julia and her peers are INRIA have measurable benefits.
> >
> > You're really making a thunderstorm in a glass of water.
>
> Hmm... I've been using coccinelle in cyclic basis for some time now.
> My comment was oversized but I didn't mean it to be impolite or attack
> of any kind for that matter.
No problem :) Thanks for the feedback.
julia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists