From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sunset.davemloft.net (unknown [74.93.104.97]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732EADDEF6 for ; Thu, 10 May 2007 18:49:45 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 01:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20070510.014944.41634852.davem@davemloft.net> To: benh@kernel.crashing.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Add hard_irq_disable() From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <1178786505.14928.225.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1178778951.14928.215.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070510003528.395b122b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1178786505.14928.225.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 18:41:45 +1000 > > > > What about my comment layout style ? I've been using that forever ... Or > > > do you mean I should use a function documentation style layout there ? > > > > /* This > > * is > > * wrong > > */ > > > > /* > > * This > > * is > > * right > > */ > > Hrm... how bad are you about that one ? I must say I prefer my style :-) I think the "wrong" one is right because screen real-estate matters. In fact that's the one I use and enforce throughout the networking and sparc ports. I even hand edit out those empty comment lines in patches submitted to me when I spot them. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760480AbXEJItz (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 04:49:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760098AbXEJItn (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 04:49:43 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:37999 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760277AbXEJItm (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 04:49:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 01:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20070510.014944.41634852.davem@davemloft.net> To: benh@kernel.crashing.org Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Add hard_irq_disable() From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <1178786505.14928.225.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1178778951.14928.215.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070510003528.395b122b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1178786505.14928.225.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.1.52 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 18:41:45 +1000 > > > > What about my comment layout style ? I've been using that forever ... Or > > > do you mean I should use a function documentation style layout there ? > > > > /* This > > * is > > * wrong > > */ > > > > /* > > * This > > * is > > * right > > */ > > Hrm... how bad are you about that one ? I must say I prefer my style :-) I think the "wrong" one is right because screen real-estate matters. In fact that's the one I use and enforce throughout the networking and sparc ports. I even hand edit out those empty comment lines in patches submitted to me when I spot them.