From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] Clean up indentation in net/ipv6/transp_v6.h Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 20:52:15 -0700 Message-ID: <1370145135.2086.10.camel@joe-AO722> References: <1370048750-28441-1-git-send-email-lorenzo@google.com> <1370049940.10556.100.camel@joe-AO722> <20130601.195806.2024506377665086082.davem@davemloft.net> <1370142368.2086.6.camel@joe-AO722> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Eric Dumazet , YOSHIFUJI Hideaki , Vasiliy Kulikov To: Lorenzo Colitti Return-path: Received: from perches-mx.perches.com ([206.117.179.246]:36160 "EHLO labridge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750856Ab3FBDwR (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Jun 2013 23:52:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, 2013-06-02 at 12:44 +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > > How is that churn different than the entire patch? > > I changed the indentation because patch 2 in the set introduced > another function and I didn't know how to indent it. Currently, some > declarations are not tab-indented, some are tab-indented to column 40, > and some are tab-indented to column 32. I thought that while I was at > it I might change them to be consistent. So this patch changes it so > they're all tab-indented to column 24; I thought that was more > readable. > > That said, I don't have strong feelings about the indentation - my > main goal here was removing code duplication. If I reverted the > indentation patch and just aligned the new function to the function > above it, would that be better? Hey Lorenzo. I think you should use whatever you think appropriate without trying to fix the other function prototypes. Otherwise, I'd do what I suggested in my first email. cheers, Joe