From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932486Ab2B1IR2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2012 03:17:28 -0500 Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.142]:48682 "EHLO e2.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756511Ab2B1IR1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Feb 2012 03:17:27 -0500 Message-ID: <1330417040.2340.344.camel@work-vm> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] time: Condense timekeeper.xtime into xtime_sec From: John Stultz To: Ingo Molnar Cc: lkml , Thomas Gleixner , Eric Dumazet , Richard Cochran Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 00:17:20 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20120228080647.GC21106@elte.hu> References: <1330388974-27793-1-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> <1330388974-27793-2-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> <20120228080647.GC21106@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12022808-5112-0000-0000-000005ABC1CC Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 09:06 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * John Stultz wrote: > > + > > +static void timekeeper_set_xtime(struct timekeeper *tk, > > + const struct timespec *ts) > > Pointless (because ugly) line break. > > > +{ > > + tk->xtime_sec = ts->tv_sec; > > + tk->xtime_nsec = ts->tv_nsec << tk->shift; > > +} > > + > > + > > +static void timekeeper_xtime_add(struct timekeeper *tk, > > + const struct timespec *ts) > > Pointless (because ugly) line break. Ack on your other comments, but I'm not sure I'm following you here. What would you rather see in this case? (I know the 80col limit was discussed recently, but it didn't sound like the consensus was for extending it.) thanks -john