From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio_balloon: coding style fixes Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 22:09:35 +0100 Message-ID: <54B82C8F.50103@gmail.com> References: <1421321941-21111-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20150115130642.GC7008@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20150115134412.GA23874@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150115134412.GA23874@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Michal Hocko Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, mtk.manpages@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 01/15/2015 02:44 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 02:06:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: >> On Thu 15-01-15 13:39:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> Most of our code has >>> struct foo { >>> } >>> >>> Fix two instances where balloon is inconsistent. >> >> I hate to complain but is it really necessary to post such patches to >> linux-api? > > Well it's human to err, so it seems wise to copy parties > interested in the ABI/API whenever we are changing files under include/uapi. > Whitespace changes should mostly be safe, but it's not unknown > e.g. to include unrelated changes in the same commit by mistake. > >> I thought the list was primarily for API related discussions. > > Basically this line in MAINTAINERS > > ABI/API > L: linux-api@vger.kernel.org > F: Documentation/ABI/ > F: include/linux/syscalls.h > F: include/uapi/ > F: kernel/sys_ni.c > > normally means "send all patches affecting files under include/uapi/ to > this list", does it not? > > Wasn't this the intent? > >> This is not the only mail sent here which doesn't fall into that >> category IMO. It is far from low volume list for quite some time. >> >> Please let's get back low volume and API only discussion! > > Maybe send patch dropping include/uapi/ from there, > should help drive the volumes down? Well, regardless of what it technically means, there's always going to be scope for ambiguity, and that's where we differ from computers: we can ask ourselves the question: will other human beings interested in the API/ABI care about this patch? Thanks, Michael (also saddened about increasing noise on linux-api) -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/