From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Smart Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/15] lpfc: Fix rport leak. Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 10:08:09 -0400 Message-ID: <556872C9.20606@avagotech.com> References: <555e1c10.+P+E84TfJG4E7Wsc%james.smart@avagotech.com> <20150524135636.00000f81@localhost> <5564755B.5030302@avagotech.com> <20150527233200.00006352@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-qg0-f43.google.com ([209.85.192.43]:36339 "EHLO mail-qg0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753134AbbE2OIM (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 May 2015 10:08:12 -0400 Received: by qgf2 with SMTP id 2so29552251qgf.3 for ; Fri, 29 May 2015 07:08:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150527233200.00006352@localhost> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Sebastian Herbszt Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org That's good to know. We have a fair amount of existing strings that are split, so I don't want to retrofit those. But, on future submits, we'll keep the string on a single line. Thanks -- james On 5/27/2015 5:32 PM, Sebastian Herbszt wrote: > James Smart wrote: >> Sebastian, >> >> Re: more than 1 space between a type declaration and a variable name - I >> do not believe that's a hard requirement. It fully passes checkpatch. >> Yes, consistent style use (aligning all variable names at same offset, >> or always 1) would be good - but code has been there so long with >> althernate styles it doesn't really matter at this point. I did clean >> up those in your last review as I needed to do a mod for the LS_RJT >> behavior. But... this seems like a nit. I did promise Christoph that I >> would pick a good point and retrofit the sources for all sparse warnings >> - and still owe him. >> >> Re: Checkpatch and string splitting. I understand we aren't passing >> checkpatch for that rule, but joining them would have checkpatch >> flagging us for beyond 80 character lines. > checkpatch seems to just follow what's mentioned in CodingStyle "Chapter 2: > Breaking long lines and strings": > > "However, never break user-visible strings such as printk messages, because > that breaks the ability to grep for them." > > The tool is actually smart enough to not flag such lines as LONG_LINE. > >> I'd much rather have the >> splits and keep the indenting for readability. We have also had this >> error quite a bit in the past and believe we have been grandfathered as >> there's a lot of this already. >> >> James B - any comments on the above ? >> >> -- james s > Sebastian