Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:58:54 -0500 | From | Greg Dietsche <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] wm8940: remove unecessary if statement |
| |
Hi Jonathan,
On 06/06/2011 08:05 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 06/06/11 13:45, Greg Dietsche wrote: > > >>> Also if you want to do this sort of cleanup, please also fix the >>> equivalent in wm8940_resume and wm8940_add_widgets. Ack is for >>> what is here, plus those if you do them. >>> >>> I updated the patch to include these too. >>> Just as an aside, there is no earthly point in cc'ing lkml for a >>> simple cleanup like this. Just adds to already huge amount of noise! >>> >>> ...and remove LKML from the CC list... :) > Fair enough. The posting to lkml makes more sense now I know it came > out of coccinelle (I guess with a load of others? - if so convention would be > a handful... not too many, but it sounds like if my semantic patch were to be improved, there might be a few more. > to put them all in a series cc'ing the relevant lists / maintainers for individual > patches in the series - that way everyone knows what is going on). > > If it is an individual patch like this, then use apply common sense. It makes > no functional changes + is well within a subsystem with it's own active mailing > list. It needs to be sent somewhere publicly, but in this case > I'd say alsa-devel is the right destination. The only people who are even going > to read this are the subsystem maintainer, the driver author or the chronically > bored. > > Also I think convention is to have the script somewhere (cover letter to that > series perhaps?). See the other series people have done with coccinelle and > how they handled this. > > Thanks so much for the great explanation being patient with a kernel newbie :)
Greg
| |