Re: [PATCH] irqchip: irq-imx-gpcv2: Remove unnecessary blank lines

[Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>]

Daniel,

On 2020-03-22 19:08, Daniel Baluta wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 5:22 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 04:56:41 +0000,
>> Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@nxp.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Remove unnecessary blank lines for cleanup.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@nxp.com>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c | 2 --
>> >  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
>> > index 4f74c15..4f11b9b 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-imx-gpcv2.c
>> > @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@
>> >  #define GPC_IMR1_CORE2               0x1c0
>> >  #define GPC_IMR1_CORE3               0x1d0
>> >
>> > -
>> >  struct gpcv2_irqchip_data {
>> >       struct raw_spinlock     rlock;
>> >       void __iomem            *gpc_base;
>> > @@ -287,6 +286,5 @@ static int __init imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init(struct device_node *node,
>> >       of_node_clear_flag(node, OF_POPULATED);
>> >       return 0;
>> >  }
>> > -
>> >  IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx7d, "fsl,imx7d-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
>> >  IRQCHIP_DECLARE(imx_gpcv2_imx8mq, "fsl,imx8mq-gpc", imx_gpcv2_irqchip_init);
>> 
>> I honestly don't think this deserves a patch. Next time you work on
>> this driver, add the cleanups to it. But on its own, it's only churn.
> 
> While you are technically right, it's only churn I think we need this
> for code consistency and cleanup.

Get real. We really don't. Two blank lines do not lead to a
misinterpretation of the code, do not get in the way of normal
maintenance, do not lead to *any* practical issue.

What's next? Cc stable?

> Even if we fix this when we work on the driver we still need
> to make the cleanup in a separate patch.

Neither. As well as removing blank lines, you could also remove the
dead code in this driver. That would be a good cleanup. You could
also have a look at what feels like a potential deadlock in the
mask/unmask callbacks. That'd be a good thing to do too.

Certainly more useful than just dropping two blank lines.

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel