Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933900AbbBJAwk (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2015 19:52:40 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:58002 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932515AbbBJAwj (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2015 19:52:39 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 08:52:36 +0800 From: "" To: "Drokin, Oleg" Cc: Tal Shorer , Dan Carpenter , "" , "Dilger, Andreas" , "" , "" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] staging: lustre: fix coding style errors Message-ID: <20150210005236.GC10543@kroah.com> References: <20150209213408.GA11071@kroah.com> <452EBC1C-3FEF-4D29-8780-606021377B26@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <452EBC1C-3FEF-4D29-8780-606021377B26@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1704 Lines: 40 On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 12:34:07AM +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote: > > On Feb 9, 2015, at 4:34 PM, wrote: > >> There's a third coding style error in this file which I've chosen to > >> not fix for clarity's sake. It is: initializing min_watchdog_ratelimit > >> (static int) to 0 > > > > Please fix that too, it's not correct. Drop the comment there if you > > think that's confusing. > > What's not correct there, I wonder? Just assignment of 0 to a static variable > to get some extra clarity? > The code in the question is: > > static int min_watchdog_ratelimit = 0; /* disable ratelimiting */ > static int max_watchdog_ratelimit = (24*60*60); /* limit to once per day */ > > So if you drop both = 0 and the comment, I think it would become even more cryptic? > > How about something like this then (not a proper patch, but just to demonstrate > the idea): > > --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/linux/linux-proc.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/linux/linux-proc.c > @@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ static int proc_dobitmasks(struct ctl_table *table, int write, > __proc_dobitmasks); > } > > -static int min_watchdog_ratelimit = 0; /* disable ratelimiting */ > +static int zero; > static int max_watchdog_ratelimit = (24*60*60); /* limit to once per day */ Ick, no, just do like other places have done: static int min_watchdog_ratelimit; /* = 0 disable ratelimiting */ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/