[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1513619815.2798.2.camel@wdc.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 17:56:57 +0000
From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
To: "joe@...ches.com" <joe@...ches.com>, "jgg@...pe.ca" <jgg@...pe.ca>
CC: "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"willy@...radead.org" <willy@...radead.org>,
"knut.omang@...cle.com" <knut.omang@...cle.com>,
"nicolas.palix@...g.fr" <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
"asmund.ostvold@...cle.com" <asmund.ostvold@...cle.com>,
"john.haxby@...cle.com" <john.haxby@...cle.com>,
"alexander.levin@...izon.com" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>,
"mchehab@...nel.org" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
"haakon.bugge@...cle.com" <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>,
"michal.lkml@...kovi.net" <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
"Gilles.Muller@...6.fr" <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
"yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com" <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
"mic@...ikod.net" <mic@...ikod.net>,
"shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
"paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
"rds-devel@....oracle.com" <rds-devel@....oracle.com>,
"Julia.Lawall@...6.fr" <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
"cocci@...teme.lip6.fr" <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>,
"dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
"santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com" <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
"apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.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? 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?
In my opinion patches that only change the coding style and do not change any
functionality are annoying. Before posting a patch that fixes a bug the change
history (git log -p) has to be cheched to figure out which patch introduced
the bug. Patches that only change coding style pollute the change history.
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists