[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090330013355.GO28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 02:33:55 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: fault.c cleanup, what else could it be
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 03:13:55AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> There is simply no excuse for ever having let that crap get there
> into fs/proc/base.c. There is no excuse for ever letting that crap
> grow. The fact that that crap is there is proof of systemic failure
> over the years to keep that code clean.
Nothing like proof by assertion, eh?
> I dont really want to see "real work" done on code that was not
> properly and cleanly finished in the first place.
Tough. At the moment we have a rather unpleasant hole with tentative fix
that touches fs/proc/base.c. Whether you want said work postponed until all
whitespace wanking is done on file in question or not, I simply don't give
a damn - getting rid of real bug takes precedence. Whitespace crap should
be dealt with as we go through the functions containing such crap, religious
bullshit nonwithstanding.
And I very much object against completely unfounded assertions claiming
that checkpatch noise makes a useful proxy for code quality. You keep
making those again and again, without a shred of evidence to show.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists