From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stratos Karafotis Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Trivial code cleanup Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 00:35:25 +0300 Message-ID: <53977A1D.9010202@semaphore.gr> References: <5396208F.6070400@semaphore.gr> <1875587.zmLYOIAyby@vostro.rjw.lan> <53977251.2090804@semaphore.gr> <1894836.tjrHdJ7Duz@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from sema.semaphore.gr ([78.46.194.137]:58383 "EHLO sema.semaphore.gr" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753830AbaFJVf3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:35:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1894836.tjrHdJ7Duz@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Dirk Brandewie , dirk.j.brandewie@intel.com, Viresh Kumar , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , LKML On 11/06/2014 12:38 =CF=80=CE=BC, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, June 11, 2014 12:02:09 AM Stratos Karafotis wrote: >> On 10/06/2014 11:43 =CE=BC=CE=BC, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 11:14:53 PM Stratos Karafotis wrote: >>>> On 10/06/2014 11:17 =CE=BC=CE=BC, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:26:44 AM Dirk Brandewie wrote: >>>>>> On 06/10/2014 08:31 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 08:12:48 AM Dirk Brandewie wrote: >>>>>>>> On 06/09/2014 02:01 PM, Stratos Karafotis wrote: >>>>>>>>> Remove unnecessary blank lines. >>>>>>>>> Remove unnecessary parentheses. >>>>>>>>> Remove unnecessary braces. >>>>>>>>> Put the code in one line where possible. >>>>>>>>> Add blank lines after variable declarations. >>>>>>>>> Alignment to open parenthesis. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't have an issue with this patch in general but I would r= ather >>>>>>>> the cleanup be done when there is a functional change in the g= iven >>>>>>>> hunk of code otherwise you are setting up a fence for stable/b= ackporters >>>>>>>> of functional changes in the future. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I actually prefer separate cleanups so as to avoid doing multip= le things >>>>>>> in one patch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rafael >>>>>>> >>>>>> I don't have strong feelings either way I was just trying to be = kind >>>>>> to the maintainers of distro kernels. >>>>> >>>>> And mixing fixes with cleanups in one patch doesn't do any good t= o them. >>>>> >>>>> Trust me, I used to work for a distro. :-) >>>>> >>>> >>>> So, should I proceed and split the patch or drop it? :) >>> >>> I'm not sure why you'd want to split it? >> >> Forgive me, but I'm totally confused. I asked because you mentioned = that >> you prefer separate cleanups. >=20 > That was in a reply to Dirk who suggested doing cleanups along with > fixes (or at least I understood what he said this way). >=20 > I tried to explain why I didn't think that this was a good idea. >=20 >> So, my question was if you want me to separate this patch into more = (one >> per change) or entirely drop it (because it would cause problems to = backporters >> or maintainers). >=20 > Cleanups are generally OK, but it's better to do one kind of a cleanu= p > per patch. Like whitespace fixes in one patch, cleanup of expression= s in > another. >=20 OK, thanks for the clarification! I will do it in separate patches. >> >>> That said you're changing things that are intentional. For example= , >>> the >>> >>> if (acpi_disabled >>> || ...) >>> >>> is. And the result of (a * 100) / b may generally be different fro= m >>> a * 100 / b for integers (if the division is carried out first). >> >> I thought that (a * 100) / b is always equivalent to a * 100 / b. >=20 > I'm not actually sure if that's guaranteed by C standards. It surely > wasn't some time ago (when there was no formal C standard). > I think it is, according to C precedence table. But, anyway my motivation to the specific cleanup was the different sty= le in the same block code: limits.min_perf_pct =3D (policy->min * 100) / policy->cpuinfo.m= ax_freq; ... limits.max_policy_pct =3D policy->max * 100 / policy->cpuinfo.m= ax_freq; Thanks again! Stratos