Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 3 Apr 2021 17:21:44 +0200 | From | Fabio Aiuto <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 00/30] staging: rtl8723bs: remove RT_TRACE logs in core/* |
| |
On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 08:02:25AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Sat, 2021-04-03 at 11:13 +0200, Fabio Aiuto wrote: > > This patchset removes all RT_TRACE usages in core/ files. > > and hal and include and os_dep
Hi,
I was just about to send the second patchset relative to hal/ files. The whole has been split up in directories in order to reduce the number of patch per patchset
> > > > > This is the first of a series aimed at removing RT_TRACE macro. > > > > The whole private tracing system is not tied to a configuration > > symbol and the default behaviour is _trace nothing_. It's verbose > > and relies on a private log level tracing doomed to be > > removed. > > It's nice, but individual patches per file done by hand are difficult > to review because you are interleaving removal patches with cleanup > patches. > > I believe this should be a patch series with a single patch to remove > all RT_TRACE macro uses using coccinelle and then use separate patches > to do whatever cleanups around these removals you want to do.
It's a good idea, but the patches relative to RT_TRACE removal could be huge
> > All of these below should be done for all files in drivers/staging/rtl8723bs > at once instead of submitting per-file patches. > > IMO something like: > > Cover-letter: Explain why you are doing this > Patch 1 of N: Remove all RT_TRACE macro uses using a coccinelle script > and include the coccinelle script in the commit message > Patch 2 of N: Remove commented out RT_TRACE uses > Patch 3 of N: Remove RT_TRACE macro definition > Patch 4 of N: Cleanup coccinelle generated {} uses, if/else braces and > the now unnecessary if tests around the RT_TRACE removals > Patch 5 of N: Cleanup whitespace > Patcn x of N: Whatever else related to these RT_TRACE sites... > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/c845d8ea7d0d8e7a613471edb53d780d660142a9.camel@perches.com/ > > Using a sequence like the above would be much easier to review and > would be a significant shorter patch set. >
moreover every non RT_TRACE deletion patch (clean up patch) is near to the contextual deletion patch (parent patch or grand-parent)
but I do not have experience in code reviewing, so I will do like you say. Maybe I wait for other opinions, but what you say is good and elegant.
thank you,
fabio
| |