Re: [PATCH 1/5] iTCO_wdt: Expose watchdog properties using platform data

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 06:32:16PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> 
> > On 07/28/2015 08:28 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >On Tue, 28 Jul 2015, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > >
> > >>On 07/28/2015 08:00 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >>>On Tue, 28 Jul 2015, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > >>>>On Tue, 28 Jul, at 12:37:21PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>The driver shouldn't be called that either.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>You are the only one.  What makes iTCO 'special'?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I don't know, I didn't write it. It looks like Wim did ~9 years ago, so
> > >>>>it must have made sense to him at the time.
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > >>Coding style wasn't as strict then as it is today. iTCO has just been kept
> > >>for historic reasons.
> > >
> > >For sure, I get that, but it doesn't mean we can't do-the-right-thing
> > >(tm) now does it?
> > >
> > >>Sure, we could have changed it to lowercase, but so far no one bothered.
> > >>Plus, of course, there is always the element that some maintainers hate
> > >>that kind of cleanup,
> > >
> > >Really?  Surely any kind of clean-up is good clean-up.  Especially as
> > >Greg KH et. al, have been doing public presentations telling everyone
> > >that there is always kernel work for anyone who has the time; spelling
> > >corrections and all.
> > >
> > 
> > Yes, really. Just try to submit cleanup patches to maintainers other than
> > Greg and myself, and you'll see. It is a minefield.
> 
> Admittedly some of us have our quirks, but I'm happy to challenge
> anyone that won't accept clean-up patches that make things better.
> 
There might possibly be a discussion at the kernel summit about that,
in the context of encouraging (or discouraging) new kernel developers.
If you are invited to the KS, it might make sense to attend that discussion.

Guenter