On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:37:50PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:13:36PM +0100, oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > From: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Manual cleanup after the previous Coccinelle script. > > > > Yes, I could write another Coccinelle script to do this but I > > don't want labor-replacing robots making an honest programmer's > > work obsolete (also, I'm lazy). > > Yeah, the tool has serious potential to make us unemployed. Unfortunately > the documentation is really spotty, and figuring out some of the more > obscure stuff takes a lot of fiddling :( > > Aside: For reviewing such patches I prefer git diff --word-diff. One more aside on top: One of the reasons I really like cocci is that it also makes reviewing such large-scale refactorings easier. But I agree that for this one here it would have been a bit more fuzz since matching functions to add the struct intel_ringbuffer *ringbuf local variable is a bit tricky to do. Same goes for big sed patches - please add the precise sed filter to the patch since reviewing that one is much less work than the resulting diff ;-) -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
