[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yeh8xRCcR7D1xdxz@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 23:04:05 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@...hat.com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Emma Anholt <emma@...olt.net>, Eryk Brol <eryk.brol@....com>,
Francis Laniel <laniel_francis@...vacyrequired.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@....com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp>,
Leo Li <sunpeng.li@....com>,
Mikita Lipski <mikita.lipski@....com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Rahul Lakkireddy <rahul.lakkireddy@...lsio.com>,
Raju Rangoju <rajur@...lsio.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Vishal Kulkarni <vishal@...lsio.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lib/string_helpers: Consolidate yesno()
implementation
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 04:00:17PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 21:25:08 +0200
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > > I say keep it one line!
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> >
> > I believe Sakari strongly follows the 80 rule, which means...
>
> Checkpatch says "100" I think we need to simply update the docs (the
> documentation always lags the code ;-)
The idea of checkpatch change is for old code to avoid tons of patches
to satisfy 80 rule in (mostly) staging code. Some maintainers started /
have been using relaxed approach.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists