[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1475775403.1914.13.camel@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2016 10:36:43 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc: linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Guoqing Jiang <gqjiang@...e.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
Mike Christie <mchristi@...hat.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>,
Tomasz Majchrzak <tomasz.majchrzak@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 37/54] md/raid5: Replace a seq_printf() call by
seq_puts() in raid5_status()
On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 19:09 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
> > []
> > > @@ -7044,7 +7044,7 @@ static void raid5_status(struct seq_file *seq, struct mddev *mddev)
> > > rdev && test_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags) ? "U" : "_");
> > > }
> > > rcu_read_unlock();
> > > - seq_printf (seq, "]");
> > > + seq_puts(seq, "]");
> > seq_putc
> How do you think about the possibility that the script "checkpatch.pl" can also point
> such a source code transformation out directly?
Why don't _you_ try to implement that in checkpatch instead?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists