Re: wireless-drivers: random cleanup patches piling up

From: Julian Calaby
Date: Thu Mar 17 2016 - 21:06:30 EST

Hi Kalle,

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Kalle,
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> Hi Kalle,
>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>> Sure, I am starting that way. I checked in patchwork and I do not see
>>>>> any checkpatch related patch pending (except staging, which Greg will
>>>>> handle). I think you must have cleared all of them.
>>>> They are in deferred state. The search functionality in patchwork is not
>>>> that intuitive and they are not easy to find so here's a direct link:
>>> I'm currently going through that list and producing a bundle of
>>> "applyable" patches.
>> Nice.
> Thanks, I figured that checking the deferred list on patchwork at some
> point would be a good plan. After a release seemed like a good time to
> do it.
>>> My criteria is:
>>> 1. The change is sane.
>>> 2. It's either obviously correct, I can review it, or someone else has
>>> reviewed or acked it.
>>> 3. No changes other than rebasing and fixing commit messages are
>>> required to apply it.
>> BTW, 'git am -s -3' is the best way to apply a patch. The three way
>> merge is awesome (if the submitter has sent the patch correctly).
>>> Some of these patches need work on their commit messages, some are
>>> complicated enough that I feel I should be providing review notes so
>>> someone else can double check my review, and all of them should be
>>> rebased and compile tested. Also, some are controversial, so I'll be
>>> segregating them from the main set.
>>> How would you like me to communicate this list to you? I'm happy to
>>> provide branches you can pull from or I could just post updated
>>> versions to the list and give reviewed-by tags to those that don't
>>> need more work.
>>> Every patch will get an email on linux-wireless regardless.
>> I guess posting the patches to linux-wireless is the easiest for
>> everyone? I have a script which automatically takes patches from
>> patchwork so that's very easy for me. But remember to use Signed-off-by
>> instead of Reviewed-by as you are resending the patches.
> If they end up being exactly identical to the original, I'll just add
> reviewed-bys to the original patches, otherwise I'll do exactly that.

I'm going to just repost everything as it'll just be easier at my end.

Git tree:

I've split the pending patches into 4 sets:

1. Cleanup: patches that weren't reviewed or were just forgotten.
2. Detail: patches that needed a detailed review
3. More Work: patches that only partially fix a problem
4. Controversial: patches people hated but fit my criteria

I'll go into a lot more detail in my cover letter.

At this point, everything in patchwork that's deferred is either:
1. Unreviewable by me (I poked the authors of most of the older
patches yesterday)
2. An earlier version of a patch I picked up
3. Too "new" (less than a couple of months old)

I'll start sending stuff shortly.


Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx