From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Subject: Re: md/raid1: Improve another size determination in setup_conf() Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 18:38:52 +0200 Message-ID: References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <786843ef-4b6f-eb04-7326-2f6f5b408826@users.sourceforge.net> <9831fce9-d689-89e4-dec8-50cadcd13fdd@users.sourceforge.net> <20161007075345.GB6039@mwanda> <77d68bcd-1ae4-4808-fc0b-6183ae5fb6c4@users.sourceforge.net> <522db506-1e1c-0563-7595-da6dc701d706@users.sourceforge.net> <6e2c26bc-d765-6225-af72-157832ab8785@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: kernel-janitors-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jiri Kosina Cc: "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" , Dan Carpenter , Richard Weinberger , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Guoqing Jiang , Jens Axboe , Mike Christie , Neil Brown , Shaohua Li , Tomasz Majchrzak , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall List-Id: linux-raid.ids >>> but patches that just fix coding style are a bad thing >> >> When you find such a change opportunity so "bad", are there any >> circumstances left over where you would dare to touch the corresponding >> source code line. > > If you actually rewrite the code or fix some real bug there. Do the proposed update steps 12 - 16 for the function "setup_conf" (in this software module) fit to your condition? Do you reject this update step? Regards, Markus