Re: [RFC] MAINTAINERS tag for cleanup robot

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 06:46:46AM -0800, Tom Rix wrote:
> 
> On 11/21/20 7:23 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 08:50:58AM -0800, trix@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> The fixer review is
> >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D91789
> >>
> >> A run over allyesconfig for x86_64 finds 62 issues, 5 are false positives.
> >> The false positives are caused by macros passed to other macros and by
> >> some macro expansions that did not have an extra semicolon.
> >>
> >> This cleans up about 1,000 of the current 10,000 -Wextra-semi-stmt
> >> warnings in linux-next.
> > Are any of them not false-positives?  It's all very well to enable
> > stricter warnings, but if they don't fix any bugs, they're just churn.
> >
> While enabling additional warnings may be a side effect of this effort
> 
> the primary goal is to set up a cleaning robot. After that a refactoring 
> robot.

Why do we need such a thing?  Again, it sounds like more churn.
It's really annoying when I'm working on something important that gets
derailed by pointless churn.  Churn also makes it harder to backport
patches to earlier kernels.