Re: [PATCH] spin_lock_unlocked cleanups

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:30:37 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:17:30 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > can we please add this to checkpatch.pl ? 
> > > 
> > > > -spinlock_t bpci_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
> > > > +DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bpci_lock);
> > 
> > That check is already in checkpatch.  Problem is that hardly anyone 
> > runs the thing.
> 
> i automatically run it for every patch i submit or push out via git.

you're hardly anyone ;)

> > I think we're ready to wire checkpatch up to a email robot which 
> > monitors the mailing lists and sends people nastygrams.  I bet that'll 
> > be popular ;)
> 
> heh ;-) It could be automated for patches that are sent out with a 
> Signed-off-by [or a Reviewed-by] line. If you send a SoB patch that is 
> broken, prepare to get a nastygram. (Initially i'd suggest the nastygram 
> to Cc: to a different email list, not lkml.)

I was thinking it would reply to the sender only.

I have this vision of dragging my sorry butt to the keyboard in the morning
to be greeted by the usual shower of tab-replaced, space-stuffed
wordwrappery, except now each one is followed ten minutes later by a fixed up
version.

One can dream.