From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "tj@kernel.org >> Tejun Heo" Subject: Re: Question about mv_print_info in sata_mv.c in sata_mv.c Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:11:14 -0500 Message-ID: <20141226211114.GA10889@htj.dyndns.org> References: <5498E9E4.4040308@gmail.com> <549DCDC3.3040207@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-qa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.216.53]:57339 "EHLO mail-qa0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751119AbaLZVLS (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:11:18 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <549DCDC3.3040207@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: nick Cc: Rob Herring , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Hello, Nick. On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 04:06:11PM -0500, nick wrote: > I am assuming after reading this function's code, that this function is completed and no longer > needs a fix me comment above it to be completed. I do appreciate that you're studying the FIXME comments but at this point I'm not sure whether blindly chasing them and asking people whether they're still necessary is a productive thing to do. If they're actively misleading, sure, let's remove them, but FIXME in a sata_mv function which prints some controller identification information just doesn't matter. If you can assert that the comment is no longer necessary and misleading, please submit a patch with backing rationale; otherwise, obsessing with each instance of FIXME comment doesn't seem to be a particularly productive way of participating in kernel development. Thanks. -- tejun