On 26 July 2015 at 03:42, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
No, that would be two different things. Do the bug fix first, and then
the cleanup on a different patch. And even then, most maintainers will
not take a cleanup patch. Stick with subsystems that do take these
types of fixes if you
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 13:05:37 +0530, Yogesh Chaudhari said:
However, is there a place which documents which maintainers(and/or
sub-systems) accept checkpatch(or other cleanup related) patches and
who will reject them outright? Wouldn't it be good to have this
documented, especially given that
Thanks Valdis. Seems like a d'oh moment now. Never thought of scanning
through the git history for checkpatch . Good tip.
Thanks and regards
Yogesh
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:02 AM valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 13:05:37 +0530, Yogesh Chaudhari said:
However, is there a
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 01:05:37PM +0530, Yogesh Chaudhari wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 03:42, Greg KH g...@kroah.com wrote:
No, that would be two different things. Do the bug fix first, and then
the cleanup on a different patch. And even then, most maintainers will
not take a cleanup
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 04:49:32PM -0400, greg.freem...@gmail.com wrote:
On the other hand if you submit a patch that addresses a real bug,
then simultaneously doing a checkpatch related patch to the same area
is a very good idea.
No, that would be two different things. Do the bug fix first,
On July 25, 2015 3:50:30 PM EDT, Ahmed Soliman ahmedsoliman0x...@gmail.com
wrote:
I have sent a patch for cleaning about 40 error and 50 warning
generated checkpatch to the maintainer and all what I got in responce
is Nack. Please do not generate patches purely based on checkpatch.
so what did
I have sent a patch for cleaning about 40 error and 50 warning
generated checkpatch to the maintainer and all what I got in responce
is Nack. Please do not generate patches purely based on checkpatch.
so what did I do wrong ?! should I follow checkpatch
