From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753355AbbDGLA4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:00:56 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:49228 "EHLO
	mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752037AbbDGLAx (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:00:53 -0400
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 13:00:49 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: about the flood of trivial patches and the Code of Conduct (was:
 Re: [PATCH 19/25] sched: Use bool function return values of true/false not
 1/0)
Message-ID: <20150407110049.GA11218@kroah.com>
References: <cover.1427759009.git.joe@perches.com>
 <93bd3fb8db14c75508f7169840824539a3f89606.1427759010.git.joe@perches.com>
 <20150331085320.GR27490@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20150331090349.GA16604@gmail.com>
 <1427820400.10376.23.camel@perches.com>
 <20150407091246.GA9673@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150407091246.GA9673@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 11:12:46AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Pointing out this truth and protecting against such abusive flood of 
> trivial patches is not against the code of conduct I signed.

I totally agree, it's not "against" the code of conflict that I helped
write.

Joe, you know better than to send trivial stuff to maintainers who don't
want it.  Send it through the trivial maintainer for subsystems that
have expressed annoyance at this, it's not the first time this has
happened.

Some maintainers, like me, are fine with your types of patches, I'd
stick to those subsystems if you like doing this type of work.

Also, don't send stuff that is broken, that's not the sign of a trivial
patch :(

thanks,

greg k-h