Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759317Ab3ICD0U (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Sep 2013 23:26:20 -0400 Received: from mail.active-venture.com ([67.228.131.205]:55497 "EHLO mail.active-venture.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759256Ab3ICD0T (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Sep 2013 23:26:19 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 108.223.40.66 Message-ID: <522556D8.803@roeck-us.net> Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 20:26:16 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130803 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chen Gang F T CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, Wim Van Sebroeck , "David S. Miller" , Yoshinori Sato , Geert Uytterhoeven , Al Viro , Eric Paris , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiang Liu , David Howells , Thomas Gleixner , Stephen Rothwell , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Rusty Russell , Linus Walleij Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Drop support for Renesas H8/300 architecture References: <1377906694-9578-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <52254F11.8070601@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <52254F11.8070601@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1371 Lines: 33 On 09/02/2013 07:53 PM, Chen Gang F T wrote: > Hello Guenter Roeck: > > > I don't care about whether I am in cc mailing list, but at least, > please help confirm 2 things: > > Is what I had done for h8300 just making wastes and noisy in kernel and related sub-system mailing list ? > > and is the disccusion about h8300 between us also wastes and noisy in kernel mailing list ? > It raised my awareness of the status of h8300 maintenance, so I would not see it as noise or waste. I might have suggested a different target for your efforts, but that is your choice to make, not mine. On the code review side, I had suggested that you should not add new ifdefs into code, much less unnecessary ones. Your counter-argument was that you wanted to follow the existing coding style in the file in question. To me, that argument is along the line of "the coding style in this file is bad, let's do more of it". That doesn't make much sense to me, so I did not bother to respond. Setting that aside, it is not up to me to approve or reject your patches. Whoever does that would be the one you have to convince. Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/