From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
To: Lucien Murray-Pitts <lucienmp.qemu@gmail.com>
Cc: QEMU Trivial <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.m.mail@gmail.com>,
Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] m68k comments break patch submission due to being incorrectly formatted
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 09:34:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA-40HYo3RhTPd-U6_iuYR-0ncn6SSgq2W4k1usfaX_0Tg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190607032825.GA5123@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 04:30, Lucien Murray-Pitts
<lucienmp.qemu@gmail.com> wrote:
> checkpatch is correctly identifying the wrong style in the changed code.
> This changed code contains the original comments with ADDITIONAL edits
> resulting in pachew/checkpatch complaining.
>
> The m68k is, by my guess, older code and nearly all the comments are different
> from the style guide. Some are "/**" or "/*commment here...." and so on.
Yeah. We have a fair bit of old-style code in the codebase. There
are two different approaches we take to this:
(1) the most common is "fix the parts your patch is touching anyway"
(ie in a new-feature patch you make the minimum fixes to the surrounding
old code needed to keep checkpatch happy with it)
(2) mass fix-up of old style stuff as a separate patch
Mostly we use (1) but this does have the downside that old style
can lurk in not-often-touched files for a long time. So if the
maintainer (in this case Laurent) is happy with a type (2) fix-up
that's good too. (Personally I used to be much more in favour
of sticking with approach 1 but my opinion has changed over
time as I've seen the downsides of it.)
thanks
-- PMM
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-07 8:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-06 23:41 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] m68k comments break patch submission due to being incorrectly formatted Lucien Murray-Pitts
2019-06-06 23:58 ` Aleksandar Markovic
2019-06-07 3:28 ` Lucien Murray-Pitts
2019-06-07 8:34 ` Peter Maydell [this message]
2019-06-07 9:04 ` Laurent Vivier
2019-06-09 13:39 ` Laurent Vivier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAFEAcA-40HYo3RhTPd-U6_iuYR-0ncn6SSgq2W4k1usfaX_0Tg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=aleksandar.m.mail@gmail.com \
--cc=laurent@vivier.eu \
--cc=lucienmp.qemu@gmail.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-trivial@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).