From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756345AbZGCJRN (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 05:17:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752816AbZGCJRB (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 05:17:01 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:33910 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752542AbZGCJRA (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 05:17:00 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 11:16:55 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Alan Cox Cc: lennart@poettering.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] vt: add an event interface Message-ID: <20090703091655.GB3902@elte.hu> References: <20090702113529.4896.2321.stgit@t61.ukuu.org.uk> <20090703064518.GA30674@elte.hu> <20090703100834.6cb241b6@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090703100834.6cb241b6@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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=3.2.5 -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 * Alan Cox wrote: > > Just a side-note, please run new patches through > > scripts/checkpatch.pl: > > > > total: 4 errors, 2 warnings, 0 checks, 294 lines checked > > Given the code doesn't currently *work* yet but is a first draft > its hardly important and there are better uses of time than > playing checkpatch policeman. Well i noticed such details in your final commits that go upstream as well - you dont appear to be making full use of the patch quality tools we have. (Also, the patch carried your Signed-off-by - which we add if we consider patches worthy for upstream.) I'd have made similar comments had a newbie submitted this patch as well - i dont think you should be held to lower standards than newbies - in fact by all means you should be held to a higher standard as you serve as a role model. I hope you dont regard constructive review feedback as 'policing' you. Also, some of the warnings were relevant beyond pure stylistic details: > > - the copy_from_user() in vt_event_wait_ioctl() could be shortened > > if we didnt pass in an unsigned long (which is pointless anyway). > > The cast to void __user * should be done in the ioctl > > demultiplexer vt_ioctl(), and the ioctl ugliness should not > > invade cleaner child functions such as vt_event_wait_ioctl(). > > > > - same for vt_event_wait_ioctl() - it passes in a type damaged by > > ioctl's limitations. Such type limitations and ioctl demuxing > > artifacts should be kept local to vt_ioctl(). > > That had already occurred to me. The events should also become a > mask so you can wait for several at once. What I wanted to know > was whether such an interface actually meets Lennart's > requirements. Ingo