Re: GPU-DRM-STI: Fine-tuning for some function implementations

From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	Fabien Dessenne <fabien.dessenne@st.com>,
	Vincent Abriou <vincent.abriou@st.com>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: GPU-DRM-STI: Fine-tuning for some function implementations
Date: Sat, 6 May 2017 19:00:24 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a4bfb464-ff72-5c9c-ab16-e48a9c88bbb9@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170506152529.7i5zveiob2aaygyl@art_vandelay>

>> 1. I suggest to combine a few functions into fewer ones.
>>    * Do you spot any programming mistakes in these concrete cases?
> 
> Not in the patches I skimmed.

Thanks for such feedback.

> However, your history of breaking code tells me that there have been mistakes
> missed in the past.

I admit that I had my own share of software development hiccups. I would also
like to reduce them. But a probability remains that I will stumble on
various glitches as usual.

> As such, I'm not willing to take untested code from you that does not change
> functionality at the risk of breaking something that is currently working.

I imagine that the shown software refactoring will improve the affected
sequence outputs in useful ways, won't it?

> This is non-negotiable.

It seems that we have got different views around the ways to get to acceptable
final system test results.

> As I said before, if you test it, I'll consider it.

I got a few doubts for this information. If you find my software development
reputation so questionable, I assume that you would not trust any tests
that I would try out on my own.

> If you are unwilling to test your changes, I'm unwilling to apply them.

I guess that the desired willingness will depend on a test environment
which will be trusted by all involved parties. Other incentives might
also matter.

> I'm not interested in double checking all of your work, and fixing your bugs
> for no functional benefit.

Do you care for improvements in the implementation of logging functions?

> I find less value in these patches if they're from someone seemingly
> trying to rack up patch count.

I am picking special source code search patterns up.
The evolving development tools can point then hundreds of source files
out which contain similar update candidates.
I found also a few spelling weaknesses while I was looking around
in affected source code. These tools can also increase the awareness
for such change possibilities, can't they?

Regards,
Markus