From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Keep kernel coding style rule of hfs-s+/sp source Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:11:59 -0800 Message-ID: <1328209919.18641.42.camel@joe2Laptop> References: <1328079593-19197-1-git-send-email-geunsik.lim@gmail.com> <20120201.020602.131240058939599710.davem@davemloft.net> <20120201.024843.318636456202840126.davem@davemloft.net> <20120202190152.GB11660@gw.linux-pingi.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: geunsik.lim@gmail.com, David Miller , isdn@linux-pingi.de, lucas.demarchi@profusion.mobi, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Karsten Keil Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120202190152.GB11660@gw.linux-pingi.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 20:01 +0100, Karsten Keil wrote: > > >> This was probably there to eliminate compiler warnings or avoid the > Yes it was. [] > I think in this case a coding style violation is minor to a warning or > potencial miscompiling. > Do not misunderstand me that I do not like to make the code better and more > readable, but such small style violations should be only fixed when here is > a strong need or the driver is reworked in bigger parts and full testing > is done. I agree, but in the future (or perhaps even today) it's better to mark these odd coding style uses with macros to indicate the reason for their use. Perhaps something akin to the ACCESS_ONCE macro like #define PERFORM_ONCE(expr) \ do { \ if ((expr)) \ ; \ } while (0)