public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com>
Cc: "SF Markus Elfring" <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	"Christian Bornträger" <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	"Heiko Carstens" <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	"Martin Schwidefsky" <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	"Paul Gortmaker" <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
	"Peter Oberparleiter" <oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Sascha Silbe" <silbe@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Viktor Mihajlovski" <mihajlov@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] S390: Fine-tuning for six function implementations
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 12:30:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170509103031.onbbgnuptd73j7ya@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51ba03f7-d1d8-8064-7dee-b5a910ad47de@oracle.com>


* Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com> wrote:

> On 05/07/17 19:12, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Sun, 7 May 2017 19:00:09 +0200
> > 
> > A few update suggestions were taken into account
> > from static source code analysis.
> > 
> > Markus Elfring (4):
> >   Combine two function calls into one in show_cacheinfo()
> >   Use seq_putc() in show_cpu_summary()
> >   Replace six seq_printf() calls by seq_puts()
> >   Combine two function calls into one at four places
> > 
> >  arch/s390/kernel/cache.c     |  4 ++--
> >  arch/s390/kernel/processor.c |  2 +-
> >  arch/s390/kernel/sysinfo.c   | 25 +++++++++++--------------
> >  3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > 
> 
> I'm sorry, I wouldn't normally respond to this, but I was put on the Cc
> after all so I'll give my feedback.
> 
> I think these patches are a waste of time and a resources.

Agreed.

> It would be different if your patches fixed actual bugs. This is just mindless 
> code transformations that MAY in the best case save a few bytes of code here and 
> there (I don't know; you didn't say).

... they might also be acceptable if they came from a genuine newbie who does his 
first patch, or if these patches represented genuine interest in the subsystem in 
question, by being part of a larger work that adds new features or does some 
meaningful code transformations.

They don't: they are Cocceline generated trivial patches from all around the 
kernel, and there's probably thousands of such 'problems' in the kernel - do we 
really want the churn of thousands of patches?

The cost of individual patches might be small, but their cumulative effect is 
non-trivial if we add up all the extra noise and overhad this adds to the kernel 
development flow.

> But the potential gains from these incredibly numerous and tiny patches that 
> don't fix anything are so small, it's a waste of time, bandwidth, and mental 
> capacity for you and for everybody involved.
> 
> I just searched my inbox for patches from you and you sent literally _hundreds_ 
> over the past few days, all doing this crazy printf/puts/putc transformation.
> 
> Another bit of searching and I see that I'm not the first one giving you this 
> response:
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/1/23/383 - Jens Axboe
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/1/23/262 - Johannes Thumshirn
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/1/12/513 - Cyrille Pitchen
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/10/24/491 - Theodore Ts'o
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/10/7/148 - Dan Carpenter
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/9/14/58 - Christian Borntraeger
> 
> ...and I'm sure there are many more.

I'm ignoring these minimal effort patches for subsystems I maintain and I suggest 
other maintainers do the same.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-05-09 10:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-07 17:12 [PATCH 0/4] S390: Fine-tuning for six function implementations SF Markus Elfring
2017-05-07 17:13 ` [PATCH 1/4] s390/cache: Combine two function calls into one in show_cacheinfo() SF Markus Elfring
2017-05-07 17:14 ` [PATCH 2/4] s390/processor: Use seq_putc() in show_cpu_summary() SF Markus Elfring
2017-05-07 17:16 ` [PATCH 3/4] s390/sysinfo: Replace six seq_printf() calls by seq_puts() SF Markus Elfring
2017-05-07 17:18 ` [PATCH 4/4] s390/sysinfo: Combine two function calls into one SF Markus Elfring
2017-05-09  8:04 ` [PATCH 0/4] S390: Fine-tuning for six function implementations Vegard Nossum
2017-05-09  8:43   ` SF Markus Elfring
2017-05-09 10:30   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2017-05-09 10:54     ` SF Markus Elfring

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170509103031.onbbgnuptd73j7ya@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=elfring@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mihajlov@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=silbe@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vegard.nossum@oracle.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox