Re: [PATCH] spin_lock_unlocked cleanups

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Fri Sep 28 2007 - 04:57:35 EST


On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:30:37 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:17:30 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > can we please add this to checkpatch.pl ?
> > >
> > > > -spinlock_t bpci_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
> > > > +DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bpci_lock);
> >
> > That check is already in checkpatch. Problem is that hardly anyone
> > runs the thing.
>
> i automatically run it for every patch i submit or push out via git.

you're hardly anyone ;)

> > I think we're ready to wire checkpatch up to a email robot which
> > monitors the mailing lists and sends people nastygrams. I bet that'll
> > be popular ;)
>
> heh ;-) It could be automated for patches that are sent out with a
> Signed-off-by [or a Reviewed-by] line. If you send a SoB patch that is
> broken, prepare to get a nastygram. (Initially i'd suggest the nastygram
> to Cc: to a different email list, not lkml.)

I was thinking it would reply to the sender only.

I have this vision of dragging my sorry butt to the keyboard in the morning
to be greeted by the usual shower of tab-replaced, space-stuffed
wordwrappery, except now each one is followed ten minutes later by a fixed up
version.

One can dream.
-
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/