From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1763153AbZCQK04@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1763153AbZCQK04 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 17 Mar 2009 06:26:56 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754141AbZCQK0r
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 17 Mar 2009 06:26:47 -0400
Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:38963 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753696AbZCQK0q (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 17 Mar 2009 06:26:46 -0400
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:26:29 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git-pull -tip] x86: cleanup 20090317
Message-ID: <20090317102629.GH6477@elte.hu>
References: <1237229111.2827.2.camel@ht.satnam> <alpine.LFD.2.00.0903162128010.29264@localhost.localdomain> <1237267595.2480.9.camel@ht.satnam> <alpine.LFD.2.00.0903170930311.29264@localhost.localdomain> <1237279833.3464.4.camel@ht.satnam>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1237279833.3464.4.camel@ht.satnam>
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: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 09:38 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 23:33 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > -static struct clock_event_device pit_clockevent = {
> > > > > +static struct clock_event_device pit_dev = {
> > > > 
> > > >   Why do we need to change the name of the variable ? Just for fun or
> > > >   is pit_dev more self explaining than pit_clockevent ?
> > > 
> > > pit already means it is a clock event, but with this change:
> > > 
> > > 1. we save 8 characters per declaration
> > > 2. It solves various 80 characters problem
> > 
> > There is not a single 80 character problem in that file.
> 
> Here are 80 character problems:
> 
> 1.        pit_clockevent.mult = div_sc(CLOCK_TICK_RATE, NSEC_PER_SEC,
>                                      pit_clockevent.shift);
> 2.        pit_clockevent.max_delta_ns =
>                 clockevent_delta2ns(0x7FFF, &pit_clockevent);
> 3.        pit_clockevent.min_delta_ns =
>                 clockevent_delta2ns(0xF, &pit_clockevent);
> 
> 4.        clocksource_pit.mult = clocksource_hz2mult(CLOCK_TICK_RATE,
>                                                    clocksource_pit.shift);

We could rename "pit_clockevent" to "pit_ce" perhaps - if Thomas 
agrees. pit_dev sounds weird.

pure (non-code-changing) cleanups should be kept separate from 
code changing cleanups.


	Ingo