lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Clarification for acceptance statistics?
From
Date
On 12/12/16 11:03 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>> Have you proposed a similar patch that was accepted?
>
> Yes. - It happened a few times.

The question was: have you ever had a patch changing code in the form

{
a = kmalloc(...);
b = kmalloc(...);

if (!a || !b)
goto out;

...

out:
kfree(a);
kfree(b);
}

to something else, accepted?

I went checking and I haven't found such a patch.

Did you understand my question?

> It is really needed to clarify the corresponding software development
> history any further?

It is relevant because you are submitting a patch and your changelog
implies that it makes the code follow some code structure rule that
needs to be applied to the kernel. As the above is a recurring pattern
in kernel code, it is legitimate to ask if such a rule exist, and has
been enforced before, or you are making it up.

My conclusion is that you are making it up.

As a proposer of a new pattern, what is the evidence you can bring to
the discussion that supports that your solution is better? What is the
metric you are using to define "better"?

Cheers,
Daniele

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-12-12 22:02    [W:0.096 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site