Return-path: Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.104]:13340 "EHLO mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754388AbcILVLz (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Sep 2016 17:11:55 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 23:11:46 +0200 (CEST) From: Julia Lawall To: Jarkko Sakkinen cc: Felipe Balbi , Julia Lawall , linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, joe@perches.com, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Sergei Shtylyov , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, Tatyana Nikolova , Shiraz Saleem , Mustafa Ismail , Chien Tin Tung , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Jason Gunthorpe , tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/26] constify local structures In-Reply-To: <20160912201450.GA8889@intel.com> Message-ID: (sfid-20160912_231211_105115_66AA8977) References: <1473599168-30561-1-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> <20160911172105.GB5493@intel.com> <20160912131625.GD957@intel.com> <877fah5j35.fsf@linux.intel.com> <20160912201450.GA8889@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 12 Sep 2016, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 04:43:58PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Jarkko Sakkinen writes: > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:54:07AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > >> > > >> > On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 03:05:42PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > >> > > Constify local structures. > > >> > > > > >> > > The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows: > > >> > > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) > > >> > > > >> > Just my two cents but: > > >> > > > >> > 1. You *can* use a static analysis too to find bugs or other issues. > > >> > 2. However, you should manually do the commits and proper commit > > >> > messages to subsystems based on your findings. And I generally think > > >> > that if one contributes code one should also at least smoke test changes > > >> > somehow. > > >> > > > >> > I don't know if I'm alone with my opinion. I just think that one should > > >> > also do the analysis part and not blindly create and submit patches. > > >> > > >> All of the patches are compile tested. And the individual patches are > > > > > > Compile-testing is not testing. If you are not able to test a commit, > > > you should explain why. > > > > Dude, Julia has been doing semantic patching for years already and > > nobody has raised any concerns so far. There's already an expectation > > that Coccinelle *works* and Julia's sematic patches are sound. > > > > Besides, adding 'const' is something that causes virtually no functional > > changes to the point that build-testing is really all you need. Any > > problems caused by adding 'const' to a definition will be seen by build > > errors or warnings. > > > > Really, just stop with the pointless discussion and go read a bit about > > Coccinelle and what semantic patches are giving you. The work done by > > Julia and her peers are INRIA have measurable benefits. > > > > You're really making a thunderstorm in a glass of water. > > Hmm... I've been using coccinelle in cyclic basis for some time now. > My comment was oversized but I didn't mean it to be impolite or attack > of any kind for that matter. No problem :) Thanks for the feedback. julia