Hi Jonathan,
On 06/06/2011 08:05 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On 06/06/11 13:45, Greg Dietsche wrote:
Also if you want to do this sort of cleanup, please also fix the equivalent in wm8940_resume and wm8940_add_widgets. Ack is for what is here, plus those if you do them.
I updated the patch to include these too.
Just as an aside, there is no earthly point in cc'ing lkml for a simple cleanup like this. Just adds to already huge amount of noise!
...and remove LKML from the CC list... :)
Fair enough. The posting to lkml makes more sense now I know it came out of coccinelle (I guess with a load of others? - if so convention would be
a handful... not too many, but it sounds like if my semantic patch were to be improved, there might be a few more.
to put them all in a series cc'ing the relevant lists / maintainers for individual patches in the series - that way everyone knows what is going on).
If it is an individual patch like this, then use apply common sense. It makes no functional changes + is well within a subsystem with it's own active mailing list. It needs to be sent somewhere publicly, but in this case I'd say alsa-devel is the right destination. The only people who are even going to read this are the subsystem maintainer, the driver author or the chronically bored.
Also I think convention is to have the script somewhere (cover letter to that series perhaps?). See the other series people have done with coccinelle and how they handled this.
Thanks so much for the great explanation being patient with a kernel newbie :)
Greg