On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 at 08:58, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > I don't think complete detailed review is necessary or even sensible. > > Review should start with the Coccinelle script: > > // replace 'R = X; return R;' with 'return X;' > @@ > identifier VAR; > expression E; > type T; > identifier F; > @@ > T F(...) > { > ... > - T VAR; > ... when != VAR > > - VAR = (E); > - return VAR; > + return E; > ... when != VAR > } > > What could go wrong? Not a rhetorical question!
The obvious answer is "you might have got your manual tweaking wrong". A purely mechanised patch I can review by looking at the script and maybe eyeballing a few instances of the change; a change that is 99% mechanised and 1% hand-written I need to run through to find the hand-written parts. But mostly this patch is hard to review for its sheer size, mechanical changes or not. A 3000 line patchmail is so big that the UI on my mail client gets pretty unwieldy. -- PMM