Re: [PATCH] wm8940: remove unecessary if statement

[Greg Dietsche]

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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/