Subject: Re: [PATCH] hid: usbhid: usbkbd: fix checkpatch.pl issues
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
References: <48d55583-6f2d-cfda-c6dd-0e789f4bf6f1@gmail.com>
 <20170301181628.GD30349@dtor-ws>
Cc: jikos@kernel.org, benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: Avraham Shukron <avraham.shukron@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3c67c4db-9b59-82f1-9406-3dfdb2ac0a48@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 21:59:31 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170301181628.GD30349@dtor-ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 584
Lines: 17

> 
> This kind of change is definitely not helpful. The original table was
> Nx16, you converted it to Nx14. Why do you think original table used 16
> columns?
> 
> Regardless, it's a very old driver, just let it be.
> 
> Thanks.
> 

I can make it Nx8 :)

Seriously now - I don't understand what is so wrong with checkpatch fixes?
I'm a new to kernel development, and the natural place to start is to do some
coding style fixes.
I thought fixing a driver that I actually use daily will be more satisfying.
Why driver being old is a good reason to ignore the coding style conventions?