From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76725B70B3 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 10:28:05 +1100 (EST) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 01:27:24 +0200 (CEST) From: John Kacur To: Alan Cox Subject: Re: [patch 22/28] macintosh: Remove BKL from ans-lcd In-Reply-To: <20091011001324.49e9733d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Message-ID: References: <20091010153314.827301943@linutronix.de> <20091010153349.966159859@linutronix.de> <20091011001324.49e9733d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Andrew Morton , Jonathan Corbet , Peter Zijlstra , Frederic Weisbecker , Vincent Sanders , LKML , Christoph Hellwig , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, 11 Oct 2009, Alan Cox wrote: > > There were 4 checkpatch errors on this patch, all of the type > > ERROR: spaces required around that '=' (ctx:WxO) > > #1466: FILE: drivers/macintosh/ans-lcd.c:112: > > + ret =-EACCES; > > Here's a suggestion. If a few spaces bug you that much then instead of > complaining about it and posting checkpatch results deal with the file > itself. > > Wait until the patch goes in and send a follow up patch that fixes up the > file to fit codingstyle. There's no point whining about the bits a patch > touches when the file wasn't in that format before, but if you've got > nothing better to do then doing a pass over the whole file *is* useful. > > (Plus it gets a patch to your name ;)) > > Checkpatch whines on files that simple don't follow style are usually > best ignored because they make the file formatting less internally > consistent. > Thanks Alan, I was sincerely debatting whether to send this because I know that checkpatch can be annoying - but on the other hand, I thought it prudent to run it since I was claiming to have reviewed all of those patches. I like your suggestion though - next time, I won't send the mail, since since the folks submitting these patches are more than capable of checking that kind of thing themselves, and if I feel it's important enough, I'll follow up with a trivial style patch. Cheers! John