From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752221AbdK1IuU (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 03:50:20 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:62083 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751878AbdK1IuS (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 03:50:18 -0500 Subject: Re: omapfb/dss: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in three functions To: Julia Lawall , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Joe Perches , "Andrew F. Davis" , Arvind Yadav , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Tomi Valkeinen , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org References: <1511809633.32426.70.camel@perches.com> <1511833514.32426.86.camel@perches.com> <7e7e64cf-dbe5-614a-f1e5-29d7b6cf9297@users.sourceforge.net> From: SF Markus Elfring Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 09:49:24 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:9DndwJXmrjAA2QrvKID2cZbczEcspj1g7XfNaPnLjtoig4AvS5d VHd/dClY1Qxow197TFxI4rk34d9MQOG3yIaSAaBypo6CZe1iGiW+USfeJxLFeafIf0vT4iq UXOggBEQtSgL+IW3w/QbE0B938dBoen9lNWOPrNiM85V0hUcFTDZ3OAGIu2VFVFaTv0B3sr /o1S0QDUuIciReWvTCAQg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:D46KGrYvBZk=:+wemnzuAedha3btdrQadvM jYtfsYCzGp7n62nWQcG6jBVa+IB1hMrlsnNQ0ssqm/qnq2p0Opf+SxAGzPJJwMEJsu784g2PZ Hicl2TC7cbbzXo0eYYxtGnovk5Z4rcW6niPhRZsGIug8MXn1BVECYWvcyrQq3oZIHXPaMp+Q4 PRGtdK/UNnTB6K+vJi3ZeTfdIoZIr7V8KQqpBJe8mEJkDST01IVcRo2TH6f2pVu5TcNAi3DgB bQJqJewG4U47URHBPgo9pB7H3lv3H3aNjeHNQXiV3Hy7kLbnT769BzWmQKcWITATwwg8q78Fr cIZpDgL+MdJKFuuNbRrA0lUHjfArvFjc+5laNkTAqmyKv2v+o8xWVKqIpGpByHqORAq6oF55q gjMDMqAu8cXkpIYMJjesHyGTW64NgyGfNQ7BG/m3tiOC+BDPEkxi6n1Y+NtwU+UNEwDnaaY3s qW6eMhEgcGi3i+6+X45obtiD+jY43Mtxx4sBRFWdOEHrjHpjOCX1iZ3bWnmM7JU72RMZ9zksE oljRa/6z8Al9BU3V5zQdOVwchcG9klZ35zNGhOJ398Dy/w9CMyYv0Xbe4OmCkx3yzWqwWfT8q /PEVREnE+23jT5/aOWVNOgWJQRh3a2vR+h9o8RpNRphczp9ozf2wyXChBjCRnWJXVRfMTjHXF n+cyBqCXXhhtFZ6hsr4GN/QqvZuguAG2NWPyZui/uwnr7e9kxyENEFP9/e/5H6QAu6oQiHatB QYwz5YUZAjH1t99O1sA1hqb/cssPA/hM+q/D9YFVxO7dWBYmRAYCIAn7fLoAEf2AHajzG7wCX S/w1VRCDHSdaYvaYHyl5/fSFTUthaj5o1U9FVTk82Uxh25DQs8= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>> It seems that I got no responses so far for clarification requests >>>> according to the documentation in a direction I hoped for. >>> >>> That's because you are pretty unresponsive to direction. >> >> From which places did you get this impression? > > Perhaps from the text that you have written only four lines below. > All comments are dismissed as "the usual mixture of disagreements and acceptance". A mixture will always evolve. * Some acceptance might not need further considerations. * But the disagreements are remembered differently. They have got a potential for further improvements in some areas. > If you look at the patches sent by others, who learn from > the feedback provided to them, I am also learning to some degree continuously. > there are not so many responses on the disagreements side. How do you think about to look at the details for such an observation? > So the mixture is not usual. I find that it can be also a matter of statistics. > Since you send lots of patches on the same issues, Yes. - I am trying to fix some implementation details by the means of source code analysis and corresponding transformation. The patch count is still growing. > there should be no disagreements at all at this point. I got an other impression. The probability for disagreements is increasing in relation to the number of contributors to which I show change possibilities. There are also other open issues remaining which can get another solution somehow. Regards, Markus