[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <20080624064707.GF6239@webber.adilger.int>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 00:47:07 -0600
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc: FD Cami <francois.cami@...e.fr>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kasper Sandberg <lkml@...anurb.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] extX: convert prink(KERN_WARNING) to extX_warning()
On Jun 23, 2008 13:38 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 14:31:07 -0600 Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > > ext3_warning(sb, __func__,
> > > - "updating to rev %d because of new feature flag, "
> > > - "running e2fsck is recommended",
> > > - EXT3_DYNAMIC_REV);
> > > + "updating to rev %d because of new feature flag, "
> > > + "running e2fsck is recommended",
> > > + EXT3_DYNAMIC_REV);
> >
> > Please don't change all of the indenting. The old indending is proper
> > linux coding style (aligned with previous '('), the new one is not.
>
> Hi,
> I don't mind which way it's done, but I'm curious: are you saying that
> aligning with '(' is codified (e.g., in CodingStyle) or just that it's
> dominant?
You're right - it isn't in the Linux CodingStyle... It is the style
that we use for Lustre that explicitly requires aligning with '('.
The common stype definitely IS to align with the previous '(' if a line
is a continuation.
That said, it is IMHO bad form to go and change all of the indenting of
existing code with little reason to do so.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" 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