Coding-style only changes tends to screw up our ability to merge
pending patches, but I'll take care of it, thanks.
- Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4 in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Segaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext3/balloc.c | 101 --
fs/ext4/balloc.c | 93 +
2 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext3/balloc.c
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Segaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext3/bitmap.c |2 +-
fs/ext4/bitmap.c |2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext3/bitmap.c b/fs/ext3/bitmap.c
index 6afc39d..c402bc4 100644
--- a/fs/ext3/bitmap.c
+++ b/fs/ext3/bitmap.c
@@ -15,7 +15,7
Vous m'avez dit récemment :
[snip]
Hi Mathieu
What about changing the __FUNCTION__ to __func__, while you are at it?
well, won't do any harm, even though other compilers than GCC are not
officialy supported :)
thanks a lot
And I think I will revamp, including fixes into fs/ext2
--
Mathieu
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:49:07PM +0100, Mathieu SEGAUD wrote:
Vous m'avez dit récemment :
Coding-style only changes tends to screw up our ability to merge
pending patches, but I'll take care of it, thanks
yep, I noticed that...
would you rather me wait till 2.6.24 is out ?
I'll take
Misc style fixes from checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Segaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext3/ext3_jbd.c | 12 ++--
fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c | 12 ++--
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext3/ext3_jbd.c b/fs/ext3/ext3_jbd.c
index
Misc style fixes from checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Segaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext3/dir.c | 55 ---
fs/ext4/dir.c | 50 +-
2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
diff
Mathieu Segaud wrote:
Misc style fixes from checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Segaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext3/ext3_jbd.c | 12 ++--
fs/ext4/ext4_jbd2.c | 12 ++--
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext3/ext3_jbd.c
Vous m'avez dit récemment :
Coding-style only changes tends to screw up our ability to merge
pending patches, but I'll take care of it, thanks
yep, I noticed that...
would you rather me wait till 2.6.24 is out ?
--
Mathieu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4
Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Coding-style only changes tends to screw up our ability to merge
pending patches, but I'll take care of it, thanks.
Exactly. And looking at the patch the old code was already perfectly
readable anyways. Benefit about zero.
I also don't see how you can
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:30:00PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
Exactly. And looking at the patch the old code was already perfectly
readable anyways. Benefit about zero.
File this under the checkpatch.pl considered harmful category
The problem is not with the tool, but that at least *some*
Personally I find it annoying, but I'm willing to live with the
cleanup patches. I don't think they add anything, though. Maybe I
The problem I see is that if someone has a more involved outstanding
patch series against the code that is being cleaned up (and more complicated
features tend to
[Andi Kleen - Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 08:41:29PM +0100]
[...snip...]
| My hope here is of course that these trivial changes are primarily
| used as a way to get the feet wet to understand the procedures
| for contribuing larger not quite as trivial changes
|
| -Andi
|
| P.S.: Mathieu, this is not
On Jan 4, 2008 8:41 PM, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I don't know, because people want to be able to say that they've
contributed fixes to the Linux kernel?
My pet theory is that it is similar to the unsubscribe me
cascade effect you sometimes see on mailing lists. One person
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 09:03:53PM +0100, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
On Jan 4, 2008 8:41 PM, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I don't know, because people want to be able to say that they've
contributed fixes to the Linux kernel?
My pet theory is that it is similar to the
On Jan 4, 2008 11:33 PM, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I think that _one_ of the reasons that made a few people sent this kind of
patches to the list is because checkpatch.pl is far better then any other
kerneljanitor scripts/easy task and _seems_ to be an easy way to start
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 01:12:44AM +0100, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
Isn't it a timing problem?
I mean, I guess that codying style fixes are OK if there is a good
coordination
with the maintainer and patches are sent with the right timing in
order to not cause
problems in the process.
But
On Jan 04, 2008 14:41 +0100, Richard Knutsson wrote:
@@ -54,6 +54,6 @@ int __ext4_journal_dirty_metadata(const char *where,
{
int err = jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata(handle, bh);
if (err)
-ext4_journal_abort_handle(where, __FUNCTION__, bh, handle,err);
+
18 matches
Mail list logo
