From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Subject: Re: ISDN-Gigaset: Release memory in gigaset_initcs() after an allocation failure Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 09:28:17 +0200 Message-ID: References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <6d4bbb77-914f-19b8-a1a9-2731d1158612@users.sourceforge.net> <6409b3b0-3b7a-1139-f040-7b1a61611187@users.sourceforge.net> <20160927071246.GT13620@mwanda> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: gigaset307x-common@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Karsten Keil , Paul Bolle , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall To: Dan Carpenter Return-path: Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:49188 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751237AbcI0H2n (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2016 03:28:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160927071246.GT13620@mwanda> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > This patch creates new bugs. Thanks for your information. > I have a policy of not telling Markus where the bug is, I find this kind of response strange. > because otherwise he'll just resend the patch This can also happen when the other contributors request it. > and I have told him many times to stop sending these cleanup patches Software "cleanups" seem to stress the review process to some degree. > that just introduce bugs and waste maintainer time. I guess that the situation is mixed depending on the subsystem or concrete software module, isn't it? Regards, Markus