linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 10/14] USB: ch341: fix coding style

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]

Message-ID: <5705B3AA.8090201@chown.ath.cx>
Date:	Thu, 7 Apr 2016 03:11:06 +0200
From:	Grigori Goronzy <greg@...wn.ath.cx>
To:	Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/14] USB: ch341: fix coding style

On 04/06/2016 08:10 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> As Joe already said, we generally don't want indentation-only changes to
> existing code. Just try to stick to the style of the driver (even if
> it's inconsistent at times).
> 

Hm, I don't get it.  I understand that white-space-only changes are
discouraged if they are freestanding and contributors don't follow up
with any change to functionality (as outlined in
development-process/4.Coding), but this is not the case here.  IMHO, if
the style of a module is inconsistent, it should be fixed at some point.
 The kind of policy you are presenting here will in the long run lead to
messy code, and can't be found in any of the official documents (e.g.
CodingStyle, SubmitChecklist, development-process/) either.  It also
encourages mixing white-space changes with patches that change
functionality, which is a bad practice.

I'll just drop the indentation changes. The rest is fine, I guess?

Grigori

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)