linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: router.c : fix 80 char limit

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 18 Mar 2015 22:59:09 +0100
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Redha Gouicem <redha.gouicem@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: router.c : fix 80 char
 limit

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:45:46PM +0100, Redha Gouicem wrote:
> This fixes lines longer than 80 char which are not debug or error messages.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Redha Gouicem <redha.gouicem@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router.c | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router.c
> index c0a6aeb..89a29b7 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router.c
> @@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ lnet_peers_start_down(void)
>  }
>  
>  void
> -lnet_notify_locked(lnet_peer_t *lp, int notifylnd, int alive, unsigned long when)
> +lnet_notify_locked(lnet_peer_t *lp, int notifylnd, int alive,
> +		   unsigned long when)
>  {
>  	if (time_before(when, lp->lp_timestamp)) { /* out of date information */
>  		CDEBUG(D_NET, "Out of date\n");
> @@ -1435,7 +1436,8 @@ int
>  lnet_rtrpools_alloc(int im_a_router)
>  {
>  	lnet_rtrbufpool_t *rtrp;
> -	int	large_pages = (LNET_MTU + PAGE_CACHE_SIZE - 1) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;
> +	int	large_pages = (LNET_MTU + PAGE_CACHE_SIZE - 1)
> +	  >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;

This last change doesn't really work in that it makes the code harder to
read now.  Yeah, the original code is a mess, one way to fix this would
be to not do the assignment here in the variable initializer, but move
it below in the code to be something like:

	int large_pages;

....

	large_pages = (LNET_MTU + PAGE_CACHE_SIZE - 1) >> PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT;

Can you fix this patch up to look like this and resend?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/