On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 02:37:31AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > As I have suggested a few times, better still > would be to have a mechanism for scripted patches > applied possibly as single treewide patch. > > Likely applied only at an -rc1. > > The stated negatives to a treewide mechanism > have been difficulty to backport to -stable. Any time we do a massive, disruptive change to the code base, it's going to cause problems to -stable. It means that bug fix patches won't necessarily auto-apply, and some will require manual fixups afterwards Given that this change doesn't really fix any bugs, I'd have to ask the question --- is it *worth* it? We really need to apply a certain amount of cost/benefit analysis around this. If it were really important, the thing we could do is to apply a single treewide patch at some point after the merge window. I'd suggest after -rc2, myself, but reasonable people can differ. And then, if it were *really* important we could run the same script on the stable kernels. But for changing "/* fallthrough */" to "fallthrough;" Does this ***really*** matter? Why are we tying ourselves up in knots trying to do this all at once? - Ted
