> That said, if you figure out some change that produces significant
> reductions in code or binary size on multiple architectures without
> making things more complicated, less readable or making the code or
> binary size larger, then by all means propose it.
Are you looking also for "a proof"
Hi Markus,
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 7:29 PM, SF Markus Elfring
wrote:
>> That said, if you figure out some change that produces significant
>> reductions in code or binary size on multiple architectures without
>> making things more complicated, less readable or
These patches are labour intensive to review because you can't just do
it in the email client. Also you were not able to review it properly
yourself and introduced a bug.
I am often remove initializers but it's normally because I am changing
something else which makes it worthwhile. This patch
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 11:44:15AM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Please stop sending cleanup patches, Markus. Just send fixes.
>
> How often will source code clean-up fix something?
>
>
> May I resend a consistent patch series for the source file
>
> These patches are labour intensive to review because you can't just do
> it in the email client.
Thanks for your general interest.
> Also you were not able to review it properly yourself and introduced
> a bug.
I admit that it can happen during my software development that I overlook
Btw, GCC misses a lot of uninitialized variable bugs. I have a Smatch
check which sometimes catches the bugs that GCC misses but you should
not rely on the tools here. These patches need to be reviewed manually.
And the "goto err" before the initialization makes everything more
complicated
Hi Markus,
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 11:33 PM, SF Markus Elfring
wrote:
>>> May I resend a consistent patch series for the source file
>>> "drivers/net/wireless/rsi/rsi_91x_pkt.c" in the near future?
>>
>> If you were sending checkpatch.pl fixes that would be easier
>> May I resend a consistent patch series for the source file
>> "drivers/net/wireless/rsi/rsi_91x_pkt.c" in the near future?
>
> If you were sending checkpatch.pl fixes that would be easier to deal with
Does this feedback mean that you would accept any more suggestions around
source code
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:17:40PM +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Dan Carpenter writes:
>
> > Please stop sending cleanup patches, Markus. Just send fixes.
>
> Thanks for your continued but unwarranted belief in AI.
>
I always tell people that I am very mechanical and
Dan Carpenter writes:
> Please stop sending cleanup patches, Markus. Just send fixes.
Thanks for your continued but unwarranted belief in AI.
Do you mind if I remind you of https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/3/162 ?
I am sure there are lots and lots of other examples.
From: Dan Carpenter
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 12:28:57 +0300
> Please stop sending cleanup patches, Markus. Just send fixes.
+1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info
From: Markus Elfring
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 14:54:30 +0100
Omit explicit initialisation at the beginning for five local variables
which are redefined before their first use.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring
---
From: Markus Elfring
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 19:22:36 +0100
Omit explicit initialisation at the beginning for four local variables
which are redefined before their first use.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring
---
Hi Markus,
[auto build test WARNING on wireless-drivers-next/master]
[also build test WARNING on v4.4-rc7 next-20151231]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improving the system]
url:
14 matches
Mail list logo