[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1610071729340.8015@gjva.wvxbf.pm>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 17:35:24 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
cc: "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferroin7@...il.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <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" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: md/raid1: Improve another size determination in setup_conf()
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > but patches that just fix coding style are a bad thing
>
> When you find such a change opportunity so "bad", are there any
> circumstances left over where you would dare to touch the corresponding
> source code line.
If you actually rewrite the code or fix some real bug there.
> > because they break things like `git blame`
>
> I follow your concern to some degree.
>
> But can this argument evolve against a lot of changes generally?
If I have to reiterate git blame multiple times just because of whitespace
or codingstyle changes, it's a pure waste of my time.
If I have to reiterate git blame multiple times to skip actual real
changes, I have no other option than to live with that (because there was
an actual functional reason for the change).
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists