From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ladislav Michl Subject: Re: omapfb/dss: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in three functions Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:50:16 +0100 Message-ID: <20171128175016.GA3501@lenoch> References: <1511833514.32426.86.camel@perches.com> <7e7e64cf-dbe5-614a-f1e5-29d7b6cf9297@users.sourceforge.net> <1511856244.19952.14.camel@perches.com> <0ecf4b17-7757-adb4-b978-a80ebb15cfe6@users.sourceforge.net> <28816ce9-9d62-7d61-1889-64407eececca@users.sourceforge.net> <20171128102327.GA30267@lenoch> <796a5c89-7c72-776d-e769-e52f5e5bf43f@users.sourceforge.net> <20171128114130.GA1615@lenoch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Julia Lawall , Joe Perches , "Andrew F. Davis" , Arvind Yadav , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Tomi Valkeinen , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 01:13:51PM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > Additional improvement possibilities can be taken into account > after corresponding software development discussions, can't they? Sure, but that is in contrary to all you replies. I guess you are familiar with Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst chapter 8. No matter that patch was generated or suggested by a tool, you sent it and normal review procedure follows. And here you ignored _all_ suggestions and concentrate solely on improving Coccinelle scripts. On kernel related lists suggestions to patch itself are discussed. Whenever you take them into account while developing Coccinelle is up to you (on the Cocci list). Best regards, ladis