From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1099353962.9139.11.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> 
References: <1099353962.9139.11.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>  <76b4a884-2c3c-11d9-91a1-0002b3163499@redhat.com> <200411011930.iA1JULKN023227@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> 
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       davidm@snapgear.com, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/14] FRV: Make calibrate_delay() optional 
User-Agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.5 (Awara-Onsen) FLIM/1.14.5 (Demachiyanagi) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.3 (i386-redhat-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.5 - "Awara-Onsen")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:01:05 +0000
Message-ID: <4832.1099393265@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 827
Lines: 20


> Just doing a quick skim, the patch looks good. Making a whole new file
> for just one function is a bit heavy handed, but I don't feel that code
> needed to be in main.c

Doing it this way means that we can use the linker's handling of archive
libraries to decide whether to actually use this function or not.

> My only nit would be to save the tabs and switch the code from:

And then it'll be argued that I should switch it back... Different people have
different opinions on how this should be arranged (of course, they're wrong if
they don't agree with my opinion:-).

David
-
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/