On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 04:05:09PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Hello, > > Le 20/07/2023 à 12:17, zhangyongle...@208suo.com a écrit : > > [Vous ne recevez pas souvent de courriers de zhangyongle...@208suo.com. > > D?couvrez pourquoi ceci est important ? > > https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > > > Fix twoce occurrences of the checkpatch.pl error: > > ERROR: that open brace { should be on the previous line > > > Can you please explain the purpose of those changes ? Do you use some > tools that get disturbed by such cosmetic errors ? Otherwise what is > your reason ?
Hi, 208suo.com people do checkpatch fixes (that is, they run scripts/checkpatch.pl -f <random source file> then try to make the script happy). Steven warned them to not submitting such patches again [1] but they keep spamming maintainers with checkpatch patches (ignoring the review warning). I voiced this concern when reviewing one of their patches and Jani replied that such one-way interaction with kernel communty is detrimental [2]. The exact same situation happened last year involving developers from cdjrlc.com domain. They also did trivial patches, including mostly (and notoriously known for) redundant word stripping. While some of these patches were accepted, others were not with reviews requesting changes in v2, yet they also ignored reviews. In fact, in the early waves of 208suo.com patches, they used the same email infra as 208suo.com people and they sent patches as HTML emails (which were rejected by mailing lists obviously) so that the latter people have to send their patches on their behalf (but corrupted since 208suo.com people used Roundcube instead of git-send-email(1)). Regarding 208suo.com's mail infra, after I pointed out this [3], they changed the infra so that patches sent didn't get corrupted. Thus, they did listen in regard of tooling and infra changes, but they deliberately doesn't answer code reviews. Thanks. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230720134501.01f9f...@gandalf.local.home/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87cz07vvwu....@intel.com/ [3]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/zjk7sc4i+mk98k%...@debian.me/ > > We don't accept such standelone minor cosmetic changes at the first > place because it looks like a waste of time. PS: And in fact, complicating stable backports... -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
