Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932086AbbDGN3O (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:29:14 -0400 Received: from cdptpa-outbound-snat.email.rr.com ([107.14.166.229]:54620 "EHLO cdptpa-oedge-vip.email.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754875AbbDGN3K (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:29:10 -0400 Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:28:03 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Richard Weinberger , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ingo Molnar , Joe Perches , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: about the flood of trivial patches and the Code of Conduct (was: Re: [PATCH 19/25] sched: Use bool function return values of true/false not 1/0) Message-ID: <20150407132803.GB6801@home.goodmis.org> References: <20150407113212.GM21418@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <1835148.WK9y2EKkR9@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1835148.WK9y2EKkR9@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-RR-Connecting-IP: 107.14.168.142:25 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1724 Lines: 41 On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 02:31:23PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > As per the other branch of this tree; an emphatic NO to that. The > > trivial tree is not a backdoor to bypass maintainers. Actual code > > changes do not get to go through any tree but the maintainer tree unless > > explicitly ACKed. > > Well, practically speaking, that would make changes like the recent > clockevents_notify() removal very difficult to carry out. Also there is > some natural cross-talk between certain subsystems. I would not call the clockevents_notify() series "trivial". More advanced clean ups that are system wide, would be different, because you are changing the way the code works. The maintainers must be Cc'd, but sometimes I find those changes are very hard to get acks from everyone. But again, the change is a non trivial clean up and has other reasons for going in than just to make the code look nice. > > Different matter is the real value of tree-wide cleanup changes. If code is > old enough it often is better to leave it alone, even though it may be doing > things that we don't usually do nowadays. Or maybe it's a good time to rewrite that code such that everyone can understand it today ;-) > > Or things that new patches are not supposed to do, for that matter, so > I generally don't like the "checkpatch.pl error fix" changes in the old code. > I totally agree with that. But for non trivial clean ups, old code should be updated too. -- Steve -- 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/