From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423258Ab2LGRQX (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Dec 2012 12:16:23 -0500 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:58252 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422952Ab2LGRQW (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Dec 2012 12:16:22 -0500 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 09:16:18 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Grant Likely Cc: Bill Pemberton , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 000/493] remove CONFIG_HOTPLUG as an option Message-ID: <20121207171618.GA18054@kroah.com> References: <20121122010723.F111E80150@viridian.itc.virginia.edu> <20121206002742.80C2A3E0E22@localhost> <20121206003923.GA18947@kroah.com> <20121207134748.B7C133E0B87@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121207134748.B7C133E0B87@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 01:47:48PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:39:23 -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 12:27:42AM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 20:07:23 -0500, wfp5p@viridian.itc.virginia.edu (Bill Pemberton) wrote: > > > > Grant Likely writes: > > > > > > > > > > You mean this series wasn't created with a script? You did this by > > > > > hand? If so then I must say kudos on your dedication! > > > > > > > > > > But it makes me more nervous about the series. Too easy to fat > > > > > finger many things when touching that many files. > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, I didn't do them by hand, it was a script. Originally, it was a > > > > couple, all basically the same, but removing each __dev*. Then I'd do > > > > a word diff to eyeball them to make sure the script didn't do > > > > something goofy. > > > > > > > > The whack-a-mole part came along because I was working against > > > > linux-next and whatever patch series was right for one day wouldn't be > > > > right for the next day because of some of the faster moving trees. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please do write a script and post that for review. > > > > > > > > > > > > > The all-in-one version of the script: > > > > > > > > #! /usr/bin/perl > > > > > > > > use strict; > > > > use IO::InSitu; > > > > > > > > sub processfile > > > > { > > > > my $fn = shift; > > > > > > > > my ($in, $out) = open_rw($fn, $fn); > > > > > > > > while (<$in>) { > > > > s|__devexit_p\(([^)]+)\)|$1|; > > > > s|\s__devexit\b||; > > > > s|\s__devinitconst\b||; > > > > s|\s__devinitdata\b||; > > > > s|\s__devinit\b||; > > > > > > Pretty straight forward, and works against the files I tried. :-) > > > > > > Greg, I'd much rather see the change applied all at once in this manner. > > > If that isn't possible, then at the least I'll use the script against > > > the code that I maintain and push th result out to Linus. > > > > Given that there are a lot of patches already in linux-next from Bill > > due to this work, I'm not going to do this for all files right now, > > sorry. > > > > But, if you want to use this for the files you maintain and push that > > out for 3.8-rc1, that would be great. I'll be walking the tree after > > 3.8-rc1 is out to catch the stragglers with a script like this. > > Okay. Can you drop any commits you have against drivers/{spi,gpio,of}? Hm, I only applied the gpio ones to my tree, you got an email when that happened. I didn't apply the spi or of ones. > Or are they in a tree that you will not rebase? They are in my driver-core.git tree, the driver-core-next branch, which will not be rebased, and has been in linux-next for a while now. I can revert the 5 gpio patches if you want me to, just let me know. thanks, greg k-h