lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 20:52:15 -0700 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>, Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] Clean up indentation in net/ipv6/transp_v6.h On Sun, 2013-06-02 at 12:44 +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote: > > How is that churn different than the entire patch? > > I changed the indentation because patch 2 in the set introduced > another function and I didn't know how to indent it. Currently, some > declarations are not tab-indented, some are tab-indented to column 40, > and some are tab-indented to column 32. I thought that while I was at > it I might change them to be consistent. So this patch changes it so > they're all tab-indented to column 24; I thought that was more > readable. > > That said, I don't have strong feelings about the indentation - my > main goal here was removing code duplication. If I reverted the > indentation patch and just aligned the new function to the function > above it, would that be better? Hey Lorenzo. I think you should use whatever you think appropriate without trying to fix the other function prototypes. Otherwise, I'd do what I suggested in my first email. cheers, Joe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists