From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754508AbZBCPYo (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 10:24:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752116AbZBCPYg (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 10:24:36 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:37192 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751891AbZBCPYf (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 10:24:35 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 16:24:16 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jens Axboe , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH tip 1/1] blktrace: fix coding style in recent patches Message-ID: <20090203152416.GH29046@elte.hu> References: <20090203135829.GH17781@ghostprotocols.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090203135829.GH17781@ghostprotocols.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Impact: cleanup > > I introduced some, then, while testing with checkpatch --file > block/blktrace.c I saw some long lines and fixed those too, some were > even from older patches I sent, shame on me ;-\ > > Cc: Jens Axboe > Reported-by: Ingo Molnar > Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo applied to tip:tracing/blktrace, thanks Arnaldo! btw., there's only one warning remaining in all of blktrace.c: | CHECK: memory barrier without comment | #555: FILE: blktrace.c:555: | + smp_mb(); | | total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 1 checks, 1549 lines checked and here checkpatch is kind of right that we should document this particular smp_mb(). If you stick a comment in front of that statement, explaining that barrier, then checkpatch will stop complaining. Ingo