[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56E71DCA.7090608@osg.samsung.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 17:23:38 -0300
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
rtc-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: s3c: Don't print an error on probe deferral
Hello Joe,
On 03/14/2016 05:03 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 16:59 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> I don't think they make little sense now since even a non-native english
>> speaker like me can understand it :)
>
> That's a non sequitur if ever I read one.
>
I was trying to be funny but it seems that I failed.
>> But yes, it's cryptic at the very least. That's the problem with long text
>> and the 80 char limit to make checkpatch.pl happy. I guess I can just move
>> the message a little bit even if that will make to not be properly aligned.
>
> There's no issue with longer than 80 column lines
> for these messages. checkpatch wouldn't complain.
>
Great, I didn't know that checkpatch had an exception for the 80 column
rule. I'll post a v2 then.
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
Powered by blists - more mailing lists