[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56CF0BB6.2040102@emindsoft.com.cn>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 22:12:06 +0800
From: Chen Gang <chengang@...ndsoft.com.cn>
To: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>
CC: trivial@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
rientjes@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhocko@...e.cz,
hannes@...xchg.org, mgorman@...hsingularity.net,
vdavydov@...tuozzo.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH trivial] include/linux/gfp.h: Improve the coding styles
On 2/25/16 09:01, SeongJae Park wrote:
>
> Well, the indentation for the comment and the '\' looks odd to me. If
> the 80 column limit is necessary, how about moving the comment to above
> line of the macro as below? Because comments are usually placed before
> the target they are explaining, I believe this may better to read.
>
> -#define __GFP_MOVABLE ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_MOVABLE) /* ZONE_MOVABLE allowed */
> +/* ZONE_MOVABLE allowed */
> +#define __GFP_MOVABLE ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_MOVABLE)
>
> Maybe the opinion can be applied to below similar changes, too.
>
At least for me, what you said above is OK (it is a common way).
And welcome other members' suggestions.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang (陈刚)
Managing Natural Environments is the Duty of Human Beings.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists