On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Stefan Richter <stefanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 2/15/2009 7:47 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: >> > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 12:04:36AM +0530, Manish Katiyar wrote: >> >> Hi Ingo, >> >> >> >> I used your code-quality script to do cleanup in kernel/kallsyms.c. >> >> Below patch removes errors generated by checkpatch.pl. >> > When doing so use checkpatch only as a hint generator and do >> > not concentrate only on the warnings/errors generated by checkpatch. >> > >> > Your patch is an improvement but please fix the remaining issues. >> >> Furthermore, the changelog is bad (non-exiting in fact). >> >> The fact that the issues where discovered using checkpatch is absolutely >> uninteresting. The changelog should describe /what/ is fixed, e.g. >> whitespace, maybe other things. (In case of nontrivial changes the log >> may also need to explain not only the /what but also the /how/, but this >> does not apply to patches like this one.) > > The commit log definitely needs enhancements but it's not uninteresting > at all what tools were used to arrive to a change. It shouldnt be in the > title, but can be mentioned in the changelog itself. (and should be > mentioned if the cleanup ever gets as far as the mainline kernel - if a > good and acceptable commit results out of a tool's usage then that tool > needs to be advertised some more.) I think it's a good idea to add some information to the changelog explaining that the patch is not going to modify the gcc binary output. Something like: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=20211e4d344729f4d4c93da37a590fc1c3a1fd9b Ciao, -- Paolo http://paolo.ciarrocchi.googlepages.com/ http://mypage.vodafone.it/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
