On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 05:33:47PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 09:14:18AM -0500, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > Arno,
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 04:00:47PM +0100, Arno Tiemersma wrote:
> > > Remove do {} while (0) loops around single statements in
> > > skein/skein_block.c
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Arno Tiemersma <arno.tiemersma@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/skein/skein_block.c | 16 ++++------------
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > Is this a V2? Several people have been submitting patches for this
> > checkpatch issue. Please check the staging ML and deconflict with other
> > submitters.
>
> Why would it be a v2?
I had asked one person to do a little extra work validating that
removing the do{}while's hadn't changed the resulting object code.
Unfortunately, I forgot who that was :( Only because there have been so
many people submitting the exact same thing, though...
> It's really normal to get a wave of people sending the exact same patch.
> There was one time where 7 people deleted the same whitespace in
> panel.c.
I suspect this is a combination of a) checkpatch.pl getting a more
enhanced handling of do{}while's in macros, and b) more folks doing the
Eudiptula (sp?) challenge.
> Don't worry too much about conflicts. It either applies when Greg reads
> it or it doesn't and he kicks off an email. Not a big deal.
Agreed from a patch management side. I was attempting to encourage the
new submitters to starting integrating the mailinglist into their
workflow.
thx,
Jason.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
