[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1513619580.31581.110.camel@perches.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 09:53:00 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: Knut Omang <knut.omang@...cle.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
rds-devel@....oracle.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
John Haxby <john.haxby@...cle.com>,
Åsmund Østvold <asmund.ostvold@...cle.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
"Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Support for generalized use of make C={1,2} via
a wrapper program
On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 10:46 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 10:00:17PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > > Today when we run checkers we get so many warnings it is too hard to
> > > make any sense of it.
> >
> > Here is a list of the checkpatch messages for drivers/infiniband
> > sorted by type.
> >
> > Many of these might be corrected by using
> >
> > $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -f --fix-inplace --types=<TYPE> \
> > $(git ls-files drivers/infiniband/)
>
> How many of these do you think it is worth to fix?
>
> We do get a steady trickle of changes in this topic every cycle.
>
> Is it better to just do a big number of them all at once?
I think so.
> Do you have
> an idea how disruptive this kind of work is to the whole patch flow
> eg new patches no longer applying to for-next, backports no longer
> applying, merge conflicts?
Some do complain about backport patch purity.
I think that difficulty is overstated, but then
again, I don't do backports very often.
I think the best time for any rather wholesale
change is immediately after an rc-1 so overall
in-flight patch conflict volume is minimized.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists