From: Theodore Ts'o Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix of coding style Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:27:09 -0500 Message-ID: <20150120172709.GB24217@thunk.org> References: <54BE4C0B.3030703@suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Mrazek , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, trivial@kernel.org, Jiri Slaby To: Jiri Slaby Return-path: Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:51402 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754084AbbATR1V (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:27:21 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54BE4C0B.3030703@suse.cz> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 01:37:31PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 01/20/2015, 12:59 PM, Jan Mrazek wrote: > > - init_timer changed to setup_timer > > - multiline strings changed to single line (so it can be greped) > > - other small conding style changes > > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Mrazek > > Note that one hunk does not apply cleanly here: > Hunk #35 succeeded at 3581 with fuzz 1 (offset 16 lines). > > What tree did you use as a base? Care to rebase? > > Reviewed-by: Jiri Slaby > > (There is a nit: leaving up to the maintainers if they insist on > separating the setup_timer change or not :).) Yes, please separate it out; in general I'm not terribly excited about these sorts of massive cleanup patches, because it breaks patches that other people send me. (I'll also note that many of the multi-line separations happened people running checkpatch sent me cleanup patches; so the fact that I'm now getting a cleanup patch to reverse this also predisposes me to not be very receptive to these sorts of cleanups. I will generally ask developers to send me checkpatch clean patches, but I'm less enthusiastic about cleanup patches for their own sake.) That being said, the setup_timer change is small, and less disruptive, so separating that out is good because I will likely accept the setup_timer change, but probably not the multi-line string change, since regardless of what you base it against, there is a very good chance it won't apply against the ext4 development tree --- and if it does, it will likely break other patches that people send me. Cheers, - Ted