On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/api/kobj_to_dev.cocci
> >
> > Fixes: a2fc3718bc22 ("coccinelle: api: add kobj_to_dev.cocci script")
>
> I wonder about such a combination of information.
>
> I find it reasonable that two function implementations should be adjusted
> according to a generated patch.
> Thus I imagine that not the mentioned SmPL script is “fixed”
> but the affected source file “drivers/video/fbdev/udlfb.c” may be improved.
> Will the subject “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings”
> (or “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Use kobj_to_dev() instead of container_of()”)
> be more appropriate for the proposed commit message?
It seems that 0-day picks up new semantic patches that are added to trees
in kernel.org, but that it's strategy for generating the patch is not
ideal. I'll just drop these Fixes lines.
julia
