[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53EF1AD0.7080704@chirality.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 09:48:16 +0100
From: Ian Morris <ipm@...rality.org.uk>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC : [PATCH] IPV6: checkpatch whitespace corrections
Many thanks for taking the time to provide feedback. Accordingly I will
break the patch into better structured parts and submit.
On 13/08/14 23:46, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 21:02 +0100, Ian Morris wrote:
>> I started looking at the ipv6 code to educate myself but in the process
>> noticed a fair few trivial checkpatch issues. There are some more interesting
>> ones also present but before tackling those I decided to try to reduce the
>> volume of output from checkpatch by fixing whitespace issues. Question is
>> are such patches wanted?
> Like most things, it depends.
>
> To make reviewing these patches easier, it's better to
> separate these changes into at least 2 patches.
>
> 1: Horizontal line whitespace changes where git diff -w can be
> shown to have no differences
> 2: Vertical line whitespace changes where newlines are only
> added or deleted.
>
> In both cases, scripts/objdiff should be run to show no compiler
> object output changes occur as well.
>
> In a quick scan, I don't see anything objectionable here.
>
> I'm not a big fan of the forced blank line between declarations
> and code though.
>
> You can get checkpatch to not emit those with --ignore=line_spacing
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists