[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131105102859.GC16662@twin.jikos.cz>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 11:28:59 +0100
From: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
To: Aldo Iljazi <mail@...o.io>
Cc: chris.mason@...ionio.com, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] FS: BTRFS: fixed coding style issues
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 03:27:38PM +0200, Aldo Iljazi wrote:
> Fixed three coding style issues. Replaced spaces with tabs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Aldo Iljazi <mail@...o.io>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c b/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
> index 9efb94e..b2fe609 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
> @@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ int btrfs_dev_replace_start(struct btrfs_root *root,
> printk_in_rcu(KERN_INFO
> "btrfs: dev_replace from %s (devid %llu) to %s) started\n",
> src_device->missing ? "<missing disk>" :
> - rcu_str_deref(src_device->name),
> + rcu_str_deref(src_device->name),
What's the change here? I don't think we need to fix whitespace, this makes
searching in patch history more tedious, namely in case where the code looks
exactly the same before and after the patch.
The style issues should be best fixed when the patch is about to be
merged, doing it later like this is kind of not welcome, speaking for
myself. There are lots of opportunities to do real code cleanups.
Whitespace changes are just noise, we don't need them at this point of
development phase of btrfs.
david
--
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