Re: [PATCH][next] bpf: devmap: remove redundant assignment of dev = dev

[Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>]

On Thu, 31 May 2018, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 05:07:15PM -0400, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 04:09:16PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> > > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > >
> > > The assignment dev = dev is redundant and should be removed.
> > >
> > > Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1469486 ("Evaluation order violation")
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> >
> > Applied, Thanks.
> >
> > Please use [PATCH bpf-next] in the subject next time.
> > See Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
>
> Guys, be reasonable...
>
> git log --author=Carpenter | \
> 	grep -A1 "Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>" | \
> 	grep -v Carpenter | grep Signed | cut -d '<' -f 1 | sort -u | wc -l
>
> I have sent patches to 206 maintainers.  It doesn't scale for everyone
> to have their own special document for sending patches.

Thanks Dan, I support this point of view completely.  Special information
has to be in one place and in a machine readable manner.  Maybe
get_maintainers can produce this information in some way, if it is
essential.

julia

>
> I asked this last time, and I even skimmed your document, but how are
> people supposed to go from linux-next to the correct bpf-next git tree?
> It's a pain for me to do this for net, but net is way larger and busier
> than any other tree.  I know it's a bit rude for me to say that you guys
> are not as important as net, but that's how I feel.  I'm only going to
> report bugs instead of writing patches if you guys are going to insist
> on all sorts of new rules.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>