Re: [PATCH 0/1] Constify struct address_space_operations for 2.6.32-git-053fe57ac v2

[Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>]

On Tue 2009-12-15 00:13:17, Emese Revfy wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > Now, a 300 patch series to lkml is not the way to do this.
> > First step is to make checkpatch.pl warn about new cases.
> 
> I will add this structures the checkpatch in the next patch series.
> 
> > Second step should be to convert all definitions, but using the "one
> > patch per maintainer" rule, not "one patch per file" rule. Yes it's
> > somewhat janitorial, but no it's not a big deal as long as it's not 300
> > patches to lkml. And it is much better than whitespace changes; it's
> > a real quality improvement to the kernel (in terms of code generation
> > and API)
> 
> The first series was based on one patch per structure type, the current
> split-up is based on one patch per structure type *and* subsystem as
> suggested by Greg KH. I used get_maintainer --subsystem to find them which
> resulted in 150 patches. If you know a better way or want per-type patches,
> please let me know (and discuss it with Greg ;).

Please push VFS patches first -- in small series. Unless you can
address Al Viro's objections, I do not think rest should go in (and no
need to spam l-k in the process).
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html