Are Small Changes in kernel accepted as patches
Hey There, I was just going through the linux-next source and found a small change in one of the files. (Unnecessary else) Now should I make this a patch and submit it or is it too small to submit? Regards Karthik Nayak
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 2:37 AM, karthik <karthik.188@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey There, I was just going through the linux-next source and found a small change in one of the files. (Unnecessary else) Now should I make this a patch and submit it or is it too small to submit? Regards Karthik Nayak
Any patch can never be "to small", in fact small changes/patches are preferred over large changes/patches.
On Sat, 21 Jun 2014, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 2:37 AM, karthik <karthik.188@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey There, I was just going through the linux-next source and found a small change in one of the files. (Unnecessary else) Now should I make this a patch and submit it or is it too small to submit? Regards Karthik Nayak
Any patch can never be "to small", in fact small changes/patches are preferred over large changes/patches.
there is a special email address for innocuous patches -- "trivial@kernel.org". rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ========================================================================
On Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:07:49 +0530, karthik said:
I was just going through the linux-next source and found a small change in one of the files. (Unnecessary else)
One-line patches that fix misleading logic are always welcome. Just remember to: 1_ Read Documentation/SubmititingPatches.txt and follow the directions 2) In the patch description/ changelog explain *why* the 'else' is unneeded as that's a change in the program logic. And then fix it correctly - if the else is unneeded because you can prove it's deal code because the if condition is always true, then the 'if then' part can probably be fixed up as well....
On Saturday 21 June 2014 07:53 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jun 2014 15:07:49 +0530, karthik said:
I was just going through the linux-next source and found a small change in one of the files. (Unnecessary else) One-line patches that fix misleading logic are always welcome.
Just remember to:
1_ Read Documentation/SubmititingPatches.txt and follow the directions
2) In the patch description/ changelog explain *why* the 'else' is unneeded as that's a change in the program logic. And then fix it correctly - if the else is unneeded because you can prove it's deal code because the if condition is always true, then the 'if then' part can probably be fixed up as well.... Brilliant Thanks for the replies
participants (4)
-
Jeff Kirsher -
karthik -
Robert P. J. Day -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu