Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752717AbcJJNLb (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 09:11:31 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46036 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751895AbcJJNL2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 09:11:28 -0400 From: Jes Sorensen To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: Jiri Kosina , "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" , Dan Carpenter , Richard Weinberger , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Guoqing Jiang , Jens Axboe , Mike Christie , Neil Brown , Shaohua Li , Tomasz Majchrzak , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall Subject: Re: md/raid1: Improve another size determination in setup_conf() References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <786843ef-4b6f-eb04-7326-2f6f5b408826@users.sourceforge.net> <9831fce9-d689-89e4-dec8-50cadcd13fdd@users.sourceforge.net> <20161007075345.GB6039@mwanda> <77d68bcd-1ae4-4808-fc0b-6183ae5fb6c4@users.sourceforge.net> <522db506-1e1c-0563-7595-da6dc701d706@users.sourceforge.net> <6e2c26bc-d765-6225-af72-157832ab8785@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 09:11:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: (SF Markus Elfring's message of "Fri, 7 Oct 2016 18:38:52 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.32]); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:11:27 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 609 Lines: 18 SF Markus Elfring writes: >>>> but patches that just fix coding style are a bad thing >>> >>> When you find such a change opportunity so "bad", are there any >>> circumstances left over where you would dare to touch the corresponding >>> source code line. >> >> If you actually rewrite the code or fix some real bug there. > > Do the proposed update steps 12 - 16 for the function "setup_conf" > (in this software module) fit to your condition? > > Do you reject this update step? I do - those changes do nothing to improve the code and simply hides a lot of history. Jes