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 S1753895AbbDGL1m (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:27:42 -0400
Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:38761 "EHLO
	casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753174AbbDGL1j (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 7 Apr 2015 07:27:39 -0400
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 13:27:28 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        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: <20150407112728.GL21418@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
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>
 <20150407110049.GA11218@kroah.com>
 <20150407111855.GD14136@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150407111855.GD14136@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
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 01:18:56PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> I argue that they should not be sent _at all_ in such cases, not even 
> via the trivial tree: firstly because typically I'll pick up the bits 
> from the trivial tree as well, and secondly because most of the 
> arguments I listed against bulk trivial commits (weaker bisectability, 
> taking up reviewer bandwidth, taking up Git space, etc.) still stand.

I agree, I do not want actual code changes to by-pass me for the
subsystems I'm responsible for.

Typoes in comments I can live with, but I want to see each and every
patch that changes actual code.