From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Subject: Re: GPU-DRM-TTM: Fine-tuning for several function implementations Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:46:44 +0200 Message-ID: <57a602e8-ba38-6cbb-078d-ac562b024441@users.sourceforge.net> References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <4d34446f-05ad-c3ce-5d33-8fb4f25af25c@users.sourceforge.net> <05418fb1-ad66-aba3-bd8c-f6b684a83279@users.sourceforge.net> <20160923125525.GR13620@mwanda> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160923125525.GR13620@mwanda> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dan Carpenter Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=c3=b6nig?= , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Daniel Vetter , David Airlie , Emil Velikov , Julia Lawall , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >> Do other identifiers fit better to a specification from the document "CodingStyle" >> like the following? >> >> "… >> Choose label names which say what the goto does or why the goto exists. >> …" >> >> >> Does this wording need any more adjustments? > > No. I have got an other impression. The terse description can trigger disagreements about the "what" and "why", can't it? > I wrote that and "restart" seems like a pretty clear name to me. This identifier might be good enough to some degree. I imagined that it would become better by the addition of a bit of information from the jump target. > I never wrote that you should harrass people with your nonsense patches. This is true in principle. But your adjustment for the document "CodingStyle" supported also a reconsideration of the corresponding identifier selection. Some developers disagreed with a proposed renaming while others reacted in a positive way. > In fact, I have asked you over and over again to stop. This happened under different software update contexts occasionally. Regards, Markus