Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:50:16 +0100
From:   Ladislav Michl <ladis@linux-mips.org>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, "Andrew F. Davis" <afd@ti.com>,
        Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
        Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: omapfb/dss: Delete an error message for a failed memory
 allocation in three functions
Message-ID: <20171128175016.GA3501@lenoch>
References: <1511833514.32426.86.camel@perches.com>
 <7e7e64cf-dbe5-614a-f1e5-29d7b6cf9297@users.sourceforge.net>
 <1511856244.19952.14.camel@perches.com>
 <0ecf4b17-7757-adb4-b978-a80ebb15cfe6@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711281026410.3443@hadrien>
 <28816ce9-9d62-7d61-1889-64407eececca@users.sourceforge.net>
 <20171128102327.GA30267@lenoch>
 <796a5c89-7c72-776d-e769-e52f5e5bf43f@users.sourceforge.net>
 <20171128114130.GA1615@lenoch>
 <bdf052ef-4f32-af1e-4b1b-6fb75e5e0af9@users.sourceforge.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bdf052ef-4f32-af1e-4b1b-6fb75e5e0af9@users.sourceforge.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 01:13:51PM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> Additional improvement possibilities can be taken into account
> after corresponding software development discussions, can't they?

Sure, but that is in contrary to all you replies. I guess you are
familiar with Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst chapter 8.
No matter that patch was generated or suggested by a tool, you sent
it and normal review procedure follows. And here you ignored _all_
suggestions and concentrate solely on improving Coccinelle scripts.

On kernel related lists suggestions to patch itself are discussed.
Whenever you take them into account while developing Coccinelle
is up to you (on the Cocci list).

Best regards,
	ladis

From 1585321029937377019@xxx Tue Nov 28 14:39:09 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1585156039807309629
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread