Re: [PATCH] blackfin/sram: use 'unsigned long' for irqflags

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Vegard Nossum wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
The patch was generated using the Coccinelle semantic patch framework.

spam ?

Hm? I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that. Do you think
the credit is undeserved?

*shrug* ... i dont see other patches with things like:
The patch was generated with git.
The patch was generated with eclipse.
The patch was generated with emacs.
etc...

we dont generally list all of the tools in the log message that was
used in *creating* a patch since it doesnt really add any value when
looking back historically at changes.

Hm. I agree that git/eclipse/emacs/etc. information is not very
useful. However...

For errors found with lockdep, we usually put either the lockdep
output in the commit message or say that it was found with lockdep.
Having this information in the log is useful because it also
establishes a track record for the tool which was used to discover/fix
the error.

Arguably, the semantic patch itself should be present in the log as
well. There are different practices here, but in this case, the patch
was quite long, and has already been included in a pending commit. Now
others may use the same semantic patch (or a variation of it) and
possibly find more "bad" code (possibly introduced after the semantic
patch was first applied!).

that's reasonable to include the actual source (semantic patch) that
triggered the resulting change.
-mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages