From: Daniele Nicolodi <daniele@grinta.net>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@ispras.ru>,
Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@cisco.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Clarification for acceptance statistics?
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 16:19:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9708653c-c7ac-dcb0-1b5d-4b74ee5ed79a@grinta.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dc59427b-5631-b7e7-e9e9-80e786a8c2d6@users.sourceforge.net>
On 12/12/16 3:11 PM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>>> It is really needed to clarify the corresponding software development
>>> history any further?
>>
>> It is relevant because you are submitting a patch and your changelog
>> implies that it makes the code follow some code structure rule that
>> needs to be applied to the kernel.
>
> I am proposing a change which was described also around various other
> functions in some software already.
What is this supposed to mean?
>> As the above is a recurring pattern in kernel code, it is legitimate
>> to ask if such a rule exist, and has been enforced before, or you are
>> making it up.
>
> I got the impression that special software development habits can also
> evolve over time.
>
>> As a proposer of a new pattern, what is the evidence you can bring to
>> the discussion that supports that your solution is better?
>
> I am trying to increase the software development attention on error
> detection and corresponding exception handling at various places.
Are you doing this submitting random patches to the kernel sources?
>> What is the metric you are using to define "better"?
>
> Do response times for system failures matter here?
No. And you are again answering a question with a question.
Cheers,
Daniele
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-12 23:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-10 20:45 [PATCH 0/4] [media] bt8xx: Fine-tuning for three functions SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-10 20:48 ` [PATCH 1/4] [media] bt8xx: One function call less in bttv_input_init() after error detection SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-10 21:29 ` Daniele Nicolodi
2016-12-10 22:10 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-11 21:52 ` Daniele Nicolodi
2016-12-12 7:33 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-12 7:39 ` Daniele Nicolodi
2016-12-12 17:15 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-12 17:56 ` Daniele Nicolodi
2016-12-12 18:03 ` Clarification for acceptance statistics? SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-12 21:02 ` Daniele Nicolodi
2016-12-12 22:11 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-12 23:19 ` Daniele Nicolodi [this message]
2016-12-12 19:11 ` [media] bt8xx: One function call less in bttv_input_init() after error detection Dan Carpenter
2016-12-10 20:50 ` [PATCH 2/4] [media] bt8xx: Delete two error messages for a failed memory allocation SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-10 20:51 ` [PATCH 3/4] [media] bt8xx: Delete unnecessary variable initialisations in ca_send_message() SF Markus Elfring
2016-12-10 20:53 ` [PATCH 4/4] [media] bt8xx: Less function calls in dst_ca_ioctl() after error detection SF Markus Elfring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9708653c-c7ac-dcb0-1b5d-4b74ee5ed79a@grinta.net \
--to=daniele@grinta.net \
--cc=elfring@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=hans.verkuil@cisco.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=khoroshilov@ispras.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®