On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 02:05:19PM +0200, meir elisha wrote: > Hi Dan > > Thanks for the response. > Not sure I got the problem here. > In V2 I removed spaces and deleted dead code. In V3 I just removed > spaces after tabs (reverting the dead code changes). > I'll want to create a seperate patch for the dead code deletion later on. > What am I missing here? When I'm reviewing patches, I try to be as machine like as possible. This makes the review process more predictable. It helps me avoid decision fatigue. https://www.google.com/search?q=decision+fatigue It sucks to constantly be refusing to apply patches because I know it makes people feel sad, but when it's part of an automatic process then it's easier. This patch here is a very mechanical patch which requires very little thought, either from the person sending the patch or the person reviewing it. You've run into one of the common errors where you cleaned up dead code instead of deleting it and you've recieved the automatic response back to just delete the dead code instead of cleaning it up. If I hadn't responded, Greg would have said the exact same thing. Even if you sent the patches in the wrong order: [patch 1] fix white space [patch 2] delete dead code I would respond to patch 1 before reading patch 2 so if you fixed the white space in the dead code it would still trigger an automatic response. I don't know why you wouldn't want to delete the dead code before fixing the white space issues. If you had just fixed the white space issues in the alive code and left the dead code alone then I wouldn't have noticed or complained. (Best to avoid this option in case someone *else* complains that there are still checkpatch warnings remaining). regards, dan carpenter
