Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1570084 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-01-30 21:10 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-01-31 20:00 +0100 |
| Articles | 4 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 6/6] staging: bcm2835-v4l2: Apply spelling fixes from checkpatch. Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> - 2017-01-30 21:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/6] staging: bcm2835-v4l2: Apply spelling fixes from checkpatch. Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-01-31 02:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/6] staging: bcm2835-v4l2: Apply spelling fixes from checkpatch. Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> - 2017-01-31 19:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/6] staging: bcm2835-v4l2: Apply spelling fixes from checkpatch. Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-01-31 20:00 +0100
| From | Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-30 21:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/6] staging: bcm2835-v4l2: Apply spelling fixes from checkpatch. |
| Message-ID | <t5qqZ-8nj-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> writes:
> On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 13:55 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> Generated with checkpatch.pl --fix-inplace and git add -p out of the
>> results.
>
> Maybe another.
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/platform/bcm2835/mmal-vchiq.c b/drivers/staging/media/platform/bcm2835/mmal-vchiq.c
> []
>> @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ static int bulk_receive(struct vchiq_mmal_instance *instance,
>> pr_err("buffer list empty trying to submit bulk receive\n");
>>
>> /* todo: this is a serious error, we should never have
>> - * commited a buffer_to_host operation to the mmal
>> + * committed a buffer_to_host operation to the mmal
>> * port without the buffer to back it up (underflow
>> * handling) and there is no obvious way to deal with
>> * this - how is the mmal servie going to react when
>
> Perhaps s/servie/service/ ?
I was trying to restrict this patch to just the fixes from checkpatch.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-31 02:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/6] staging: bcm2835-v4l2: Apply spelling fixes from checkpatch. |
| Message-ID | <t5vAl-2Rg-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1570084 |
On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 12:05 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
> Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 13:55 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > > Generated with checkpatch.pl --fix-inplace and git add -p out of the
> > > results.
> >
> > Maybe another.
> >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/platform/bcm2835/mmal-vchiq.c b/drivers/staging/media/platform/bcm2835/mmal-vchiq.c
> >
> > []
> > > @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ static int bulk_receive(struct vchiq_mmal_instance *instance,
> > > pr_err("buffer list empty trying to submit bulk receive\n");
> > >
> > > /* todo: this is a serious error, we should never have
> > > - * commited a buffer_to_host operation to the mmal
> > > + * committed a buffer_to_host operation to the mmal
> > > * port without the buffer to back it up (underflow
> > > * handling) and there is no obvious way to deal with
> > > * this - how is the mmal servie going to react when
> >
> > Perhaps s/servie/service/ ?
>
> I was trying to restrict this patch to just the fixes from checkpatch.
That's the wrong thing to do if you're fixing
spelling defects. checkpatch is just one mechanism
to identify some, and definitely not all, typos and
spelling defects.
If you fixing, fix. Don't just rely on the brainless
tools, use your decidedly non-mechanical brain.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-31 19:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t5Lvr-44k-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1570244 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> writes:
> On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 12:05 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 13:55 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> > > Generated with checkpatch.pl --fix-inplace and git add -p out of the
>> > > results.
>> >
>> > Maybe another.
>> >
>> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/platform/bcm2835/mmal-vchiq.c b/drivers/staging/media/platform/bcm2835/mmal-vchiq.c
>> >
>> > []
>> > > @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ static int bulk_receive(struct vchiq_mmal_instance *instance,
>> > > pr_err("buffer list empty trying to submit bulk receive\n");
>> > >
>> > > /* todo: this is a serious error, we should never have
>> > > - * commited a buffer_to_host operation to the mmal
>> > > + * committed a buffer_to_host operation to the mmal
>> > > * port without the buffer to back it up (underflow
>> > > * handling) and there is no obvious way to deal with
>> > > * this - how is the mmal servie going to react when
>> >
>> > Perhaps s/servie/service/ ?
>>
>> I was trying to restrict this patch to just the fixes from checkpatch.
>
> That's the wrong thing to do if you're fixing
> spelling defects. checkpatch is just one mechanism
> to identify some, and definitely not all, typos and
> spelling defects.
>
> If you fixing, fix. Don't just rely on the brainless
> tools, use your decidedly non-mechanical brain.
"if you touch anything, you must fix everything." If that's how things
work, I would just retract the patch.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-31 20:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/6] staging: bcm2835-v4l2: Apply spelling fixes from checkpatch. |
| Message-ID | <t5LON-4b0-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1570982 |
On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 10:30 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
> Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> writes:
>
> > On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 12:05 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > > Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> writes:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 13:55 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > > > > Generated with checkpatch.pl --fix-inplace and git add -p out of the
> > > > > results.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe another.
> > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/platform/bcm2835/mmal-vchiq.c b/drivers/staging/media/platform/bcm2835/mmal-vchiq.c
> > > >
> > > > []
> > > > > @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ static int bulk_receive(struct vchiq_mmal_instance *instance,
> > > > > pr_err("buffer list empty trying to submit bulk receive\n");
> > > > >
> > > > > /* todo: this is a serious error, we should never have
> > > > > - * commited a buffer_to_host operation to the mmal
> > > > > + * committed a buffer_to_host operation to the mmal
> > > > > * port without the buffer to back it up (underflow
> > > > > * handling) and there is no obvious way to deal with
> > > > > * this - how is the mmal servie going to react when
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps s/servie/service/ ?
> > >
> > > I was trying to restrict this patch to just the fixes from checkpatch.
> >
> > That's the wrong thing to do if you're fixing
> > spelling defects. checkpatch is just one mechanism
> > to identify some, and definitely not all, typos and
> > spelling defects.
> >
> > If you fixing, fix. Don't just rely on the brainless
> > tools, use your decidedly non-mechanical brain.
>
> "if you touch anything, you must fix everything." If that's how things
> work, I would just retract the patch.
I didn't say that,and I don't mean that.
If you notice a similar defect when you are fixing
any arbitrary defect, please try to fix all of similar
defects.
As is, a patch that fixes just servie would cause a
patch conflict with your patch.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web