Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754476AbaDNXia (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Apr 2014 19:38:30 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:50399 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750873AbaDNXi3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Apr 2014 19:38:29 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 01:38:40 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Viresh Kumar cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, Arvind.Chauhan@arm.com, linaro-networking@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/38] tick cleanups and bugfixes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 14 Apr 2014, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > These are separate cleanups from the timers/hrtimers ones I did. I was waiting > for the merge window to close in order to send these and by the time it > happened, I got a long pending list. > > These are mostly cleanups, reorders for better readability or efficiency, and > few bugfixes. And that's wrong to begin with. Bugfixes first and then all other stuff. We dont want dependencies of bugfixes on cleanups, reordering of code ... I'm not applying a wholesale checkpatch.pl patch which creates noise for no value. I don't mind if you cleanup stuff while doing other changes, but definitely not as a stand alone starter of a large patch queue with bugfixes which depend on that. Now looking at the thing some more, it contains gems like this: - printk(KERN_ERR "tick-broadcast: ignoring broadcast for " - "offline CPU #%d\n", *oncpu); + printk(KERN_ERR "tick-broadcast: ignoring broadcast for offline CPU #%d\n", + *oncpu); If you fix that checkpatch.pl line wrap issue, why do you not change printk(KERN_ERR) to pr_err() as well? checkpatch.pl is happy, right? I'm tired of this, really. Please send me the next series in the following way: - send a bug fix series, which does nothing else than fixing bugs. when that is applied, then - send a small batch of improvements for a particular issue and not a mixed bag of random patches. Thanks, tglx -- 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/