[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1497464128.18751.59.camel@perches.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 11:15:28 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] staging: lustre: lustre: several over 80 characters
cleanups
On Wed, 2017-06-14 at 11:01 -0400, James Simmons wrote:
> Cleanup many of the over 80 characters reported by checkpatch
Please don't let checkpatch get in the way of lustre
readability.
lustre commonly uses very long identifiers.
Long identifiers and 80 columns don't mix well.
It might be simpler to declare in some document that
lustre uses lines of up to whatever length and require
that checkpatch should be used with the --max-line-length
option when run on lustre code.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists