Re: [PATCH v2] v4l: videobuf: code cleanup.

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>]

Pawel Osciak wrote:
>> Aguirre, Sergio wrote:
>>> Make videobuf pass checkpatch; minor code cleanups.
>> I thought this kind patches were frowned upon..
>>
>> http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/development-process/4.Coding#41
>>
>> But maybe it's acceptable in this case... I'm not an expert on community policies :)
> 
> Hm, right...
> I'm not an expert either, but it does seem reasonable. It was just a part of the
> roadmap we agreed on in Norway, so I simply went ahead with it. Merging with other
> patches would pollute them so I just posted it separately. I will leave the
> decision up to Mauro then. I have some more "normal" patches lined up,
> so please let me know. I'm guessing we are cancelling the clean-up then though.

It is fine for me to send such patch in a series of changes. A pure CodingStyle patch
is preferred if you're doing lots of changes, since it is very easy to review those
changes. Yet, I generally hold pure CodingStyle changes to happen at the end of an
rc cycle, to avoid conflicts with real patches, especially when the change is on a
code that use to have lots of changes during a kernel cycle.

In the specific case of videobuf, I prefer to merge any changes functional changes at the
beginning of a -rc cycle, and after having several tested-by replies with different
architectures and boards, as a trouble there will affect almost all drivers.

Cheers,
Mauro