On Thu, 07/07 11:18, Cao jin wrote:
>
>
> On 07/07/2016 08:31 AM, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > On Wed, 07/06 15:46, Cao jin wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Yes, but in this patch I think the blank line changes are 1) more of
> > personal
> > taste, 2) completely unrelated (neither lines nor semantics) to the
>
On 07/07/2016 08:31 AM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 07/06 15:46, Cao jin wrote:
Yes, but in this patch I think the blank line changes are 1) more of personal
taste, 2) completely unrelated (neither lines nor semantics) to the functional
change.
Fam
Indeed, my personal taste. Generally
On Wed, 07/06 15:46, Cao jin wrote:
>
> On 07/06/2016 02:46 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > On Wed, 07/06 11:03, Cao jin wrote:
> > > pointer 'qemu_aio_context' should be checked first before it is used.
> > > qemu_bh_new() will use it.
> > >
> > > Also add extra newlines to make code well separated
On 07/06/2016 02:46 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
On Wed, 07/06 11:03, Cao jin wrote:
pointer 'qemu_aio_context' should be checked first before it is used.
qemu_bh_new() will use it.
Also add extra newlines to make code well separated and easier to read.
This "also" is not good, please only do one
On Wed, 07/06 11:03, Cao jin wrote:
> pointer 'qemu_aio_context' should be checked first before it is used.
> qemu_bh_new() will use it.
>
> Also add extra newlines to make code well separated and easier to read.
This "also" is not good, please only do one thing in a patch.
Fam
>
>
cc Paolo again, because failed to deliver in 'git send-email'
On 07/06/2016 11:03 AM, Cao jin wrote:
pointer 'qemu_aio_context' should be checked first before it is used.
qemu_bh_new() will use it.
Also add extra newlines to make code well separated and easier to read.
Signed-off-by: Cao jin
