From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Bernie Thompson <bernie@plugable.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 20:05:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2008272204050.2482@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13cd8bf4-06f9-04d7-e923-c397c506e8cc@web.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 903 bytes --]
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/api/kobj_to_dev.cocci
> >
> > Fixes: a2fc3718bc22 ("coccinelle: api: add kobj_to_dev.cocci script")
>
> I wonder about such a combination of information.
>
> I find it reasonable that two function implementations should be adjusted
> according to a generated patch.
> Thus I imagine that not the mentioned SmPL script is “fixed”
> but the affected source file “drivers/video/fbdev/udlfb.c” may be improved.
> Will the subject “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings”
> (or “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Use kobj_to_dev() instead of container_of()”)
> be more appropriate for the proposed commit message?
It seems that 0-day picks up new semantic patches that are added to trees
in kernel.org, but that it's strategy for generating the patch is not
ideal. I'll just drop these Fixes lines.
julia
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Bernie Thompson <bernie@plugable.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 22:05:10 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2008272204050.2482@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13cd8bf4-06f9-04d7-e923-c397c506e8cc@web.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 903 bytes --]
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/api/kobj_to_dev.cocci
> >
> > Fixes: a2fc3718bc22 ("coccinelle: api: add kobj_to_dev.cocci script")
>
> I wonder about such a combination of information.
>
> I find it reasonable that two function implementations should be adjusted
> according to a generated patch.
> Thus I imagine that not the mentioned SmPL script is “fixed”
> but the affected source file “drivers/video/fbdev/udlfb.c” may be improved.
> Will the subject “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings”
> (or “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Use kobj_to_dev() instead of container_of()”)
> be more appropriate for the proposed commit message?
It seems that 0-day picks up new semantic patches that are added to trees
in kernel.org, but that it's strategy for generating the patch is not
ideal. I'll just drop these Fixes lines.
julia
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 22:05:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2008272204050.2482@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13cd8bf4-06f9-04d7-e923-c397c506e8cc@web.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 927 bytes --]
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/api/kobj_to_dev.cocci
> >
> > Fixes: a2fc3718bc22 ("coccinelle: api: add kobj_to_dev.cocci script")
>
> I wonder about such a combination of information.
>
> I find it reasonable that two function implementations should be adjusted
> according to a generated patch.
> Thus I imagine that not the mentioned SmPL script is “fixed”
> but the affected source file “drivers/video/fbdev/udlfb.c” may be improved.
> Will the subject “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings”
> (or “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Use kobj_to_dev() instead of container_of()”)
> be more appropriate for the proposed commit message?
It seems that 0-day picks up new semantic patches that are added to trees
in kernel.org, but that it's strategy for generating the patch is not
ideal. I'll just drop these Fixes lines.
julia
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
Bernie Thompson <bernie@plugable.com>,
Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>,
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 22:05:10 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2008272204050.2482@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13cd8bf4-06f9-04d7-e923-c397c506e8cc@web.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 903 bytes --]
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/api/kobj_to_dev.cocci
> >
> > Fixes: a2fc3718bc22 ("coccinelle: api: add kobj_to_dev.cocci script")
>
> I wonder about such a combination of information.
>
> I find it reasonable that two function implementations should be adjusted
> according to a generated patch.
> Thus I imagine that not the mentioned SmPL script is “fixed”
> but the affected source file “drivers/video/fbdev/udlfb.c” may be improved.
> Will the subject “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings”
> (or “[PATCH] video: udlfb: Use kobj_to_dev() instead of container_of()”)
> be more appropriate for the proposed commit message?
It seems that 0-day picks up new semantic patches that are added to trees
in kernel.org, but that it's strategy for generating the patch is not
ideal. I'll just drop these Fixes lines.
julia
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-27 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-27 17:03 [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings Markus Elfring
2020-08-27 20:05 ` Julia Lawall [this message]
2020-08-27 20:05 ` Julia Lawall
2020-08-27 20:05 ` Julia Lawall
2020-08-27 20:05 ` Julia Lawall
2020-08-28 16:52 ` Markus Elfring
2020-08-28 16:52 ` Markus Elfring
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-07-05 11:59 drivers/scsi/ipr.c:4209:61-62: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2021-07-05 11:59 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2021-04-03 0:10 drivers/nvdimm/region_devs.c:762:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2021-04-03 0:10 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2021-03-31 20:25 drivers/scsi/ipr.c:4209:61-62: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2021-03-31 20:25 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2021-03-16 22:20 drivers/platform/x86/asus-laptop.c:1572:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2021-03-16 22:21 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2021-03-10 0:31 drivers/input/misc/ims-pcu.c:1231:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2021-03-10 0:31 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2021-03-10 0:31 ` kernel test robot
2021-01-08 9:40 drivers/nvdimm/namespace_devs.c:1626:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2021-01-08 9:40 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2021-01-01 9:01 drivers/platform/x86/ideapad-laptop.c:522:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2021-01-01 9:01 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-12-21 6:39 drivers/mfd/lm3533-core.c:361:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-12-21 6:39 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-12-21 6:38 drivers/mfd/lm3533-core.c:361:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-12-21 6:38 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-12-20 11:36 drivers/mfd/lm3533-core.c:361:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-12-20 11:36 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-12-15 9:25 drivers/nvdimm/namespace_devs.c:1626:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-12-15 9:25 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-12-10 5:15 drivers/scsi/esas2r/esas2r_main.c:62:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-12-10 5:15 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-12-03 1:10 drivers/scsi/3w-sas.c:102:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-12-03 1:10 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-11-23 22:20 drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_spi.c:1460:61-62: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-11-23 22:20 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-11-20 11:00 drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_iscsi.c:4041:61-62: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-11-20 11:00 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-11-16 13:14 drivers/nvdimm/namespace_devs.c:1626:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-11-16 13:14 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-11-13 8:52 drivers/hwmon/pwm-fan.c:150:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-11-13 8:52 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-11-11 9:50 drivers/nvme/host/lightnvm.c:1244:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-11-11 9:50 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 [jlawall:for-5.10 3/10] drivers/nvme/host/core.c:3646:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-02 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-28 2:40 [jlawall:for-5.10 3/9] drivers/block/virtio_blk.c:634:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-09-28 2:40 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 [jlawall:for-5.10 3/4] drivers/iio/adc/adi-axi-adc.c:279:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-01 9:46 ` kernel test robot
2020-08-27 20:13 Julia Lawall
2020-08-27 20:13 ` Julia Lawall
2020-08-27 20:13 ` Julia Lawall
2020-08-27 22:24 ` Jens Axboe
2020-08-27 22:24 ` Jens Axboe
2020-08-26 23:27 [jlawall:for-5.10 3/3] drivers/scsi/3w-sas.c:102:60-61: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-08-26 23:27 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
2020-08-26 23:27 ` kernel test robot
2020-08-26 23:27 ` kernel test robot
2020-08-26 23:27 ` kernel test robot
2020-08-26 23:27 ` kernel test robot
2020-08-26 23:27 ` kernel test robot
[not found] <CGME20200826205412eucas1p16c748e9d73f4cd924aae1d6386ab450c@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
2020-08-26 20:54 ` Julia Lawall
2020-08-26 20:54 ` Julia Lawall
2020-08-26 20:54 ` Julia Lawall
2020-08-26 20:54 ` Julia Lawall
2020-09-08 11:37 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2020-09-08 11:37 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2020-09-08 11:37 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2020-09-08 11:37 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2020-08-26 19:51 [jlawall:for-5.10 3/3] drivers/video/fbdev/udlfb.c:1460:62-63: WARNING opportunity for kobj_to_dev() kernel test robot
2020-08-26 19:51 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: api: fix kobj_to_dev.cocci warnings kernel test robot
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=alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2008272204050.2482@hadrien \
--to=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=b.zolnierkie@samsung.com \
--cc=bernie@plugable.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=efremov@linux.com \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.