Re: [git pull] PCI pull request for 2.6.27

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org <linux-pci@...>
Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 - 7:50 pm

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Jesse Barnes wrote:

Please don't take patches like this.

If it's janitor work, the end result should be better. But it's not. This 
patch is full of stuff like

-	for(addr = (u8 *) __va(0xf0000); addr < (u8 *) __va(0x100000); addr += 16) {
+	for (addr = (u8 *) __va(0xf0000); addr < (u8 *) __va(0x100000);
+		addr += 16) {
 		rt = pirq_check_routing_table(addr);

Which just brings negative value. The code is _harder_ to look at, not 
easier.

The 80-character limit is less important than making code look obvious and 
indentation being readable. Splitting the for(;;) loop just made the 
indentation look like total crap.

I'm fixing it up (since it also caused trivial conflicts), but I'd ask 
people to just ignore that sh*t-for-brains that is the long-line warning 
when trying to fix it may silence a warning, but results in worse code!

		Linus
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[git pull] PCI pull request for 2.6.27, Jesse Barnes, (Wed Jul 16, 7:39 pm)
Re: [git pull] PCI pull request for 2.6.27, Linus Torvalds, (Wed Jul 16, 8:28 pm)
Re: [git pull] PCI pull request for 2.6.27, Linus Torvalds, (Wed Jul 16, 7:50 pm)
Re: [git pull] PCI pull request for 2.6.27, Jesse Barnes, (Wed Jul 16, 7:54 pm)
Re: [git pull] PCI pull request for 2.6.27, Maciej W. Rozycki, (Wed Jul 16, 8:23 pm)
Re: [git pull] PCI pull request for 2.6.27, Linus Torvalds, (Wed Jul 16, 8:38 pm)