[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5753346.hxK14sqO5y@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 22:17:40 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@...il.com>
Cc: dirk.j.brandewie@...el.com,
Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Trivial code cleanup
On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:26:44 AM Dirk Brandewie wrote:
> On 06/10/2014 08:31 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 08:12:48 AM Dirk Brandewie wrote:
> >> On 06/09/2014 02:01 PM, Stratos Karafotis wrote:
> >>> Remove unnecessary blank lines.
> >>> Remove unnecessary parentheses.
> >>> Remove unnecessary braces.
> >>> Put the code in one line where possible.
> >>> Add blank lines after variable declarations.
> >>> Alignment to open parenthesis.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I don't have an issue with this patch in general but I would rather
> >> the cleanup be done when there is a functional change in the given
> >> hunk of code otherwise you are setting up a fence for stable/backporters
> >> of functional changes in the future.
> >
> > I actually prefer separate cleanups so as to avoid doing multiple things
> > in one patch.
> >
> > Rafael
> >
> I don't have strong feelings either way I was just trying to be kind
> to the maintainers of distro kernels.
And mixing fixes with cleanups in one patch doesn't do any good to them.
Trust me, I used to work for a distro. :-)
Rafael
--
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