From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760617Ab2CNBHJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2012 21:07:09 -0400 Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:57731 "EHLO test.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760233Ab2CNBHG (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2012 21:07:06 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 21:07:01 -0400 From: "Ted Ts'o" To: Joe Perches Cc: Andrew Morton , Andy Whitcroft , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Suggest pr_ over printk(KERN_ Message-ID: <20120314010701.GB15379@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Ts'o , Joe Perches , Andrew Morton , Andy Whitcroft , LKML References: <1330661602.1939.13.camel@joe2Laptop> <1330666534.1939.19.camel@joe2Laptop> <1330667673.1939.22.camel@joe2Laptop> <1331619783.7100.8.camel@joe2Laptop> <20120313120514.GA17538@thunk.org> <20120313145517.f4fcae46.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20120313220144.GD11969@thunk.org> <20120313150316.6ae19b95.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20120314003157.GA15379@thunk.org> <1331686026.24613.6.camel@joe2Laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1331686026.24613.6.camel@joe2Laptop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on test.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 05:47:06PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > Or add an I: line to MAINTAINERS > > though perhaps it's better to agree on a style. > > I did send a few fixes and a style consolidation patch > for ext4 with no reply awhile ago: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/2/41 You combined a huge number of changes into a single patch, and as far as I was concerned the value it added Just Wasn't Worth It. It adds noise which causes other patches, which add real value, not to apply cleanly. I routinely ignore such patches because I have a limited amount of time, and as far as I'm concerned they mainly make my life harder. Looking more closely, there are a few changes in there that I'd accept, but it was burried amongst so much other junk that if it's all or nothing, it would be nothing. Funny that someone who is an expert in style things neglected something **far** more important --- segregate logical changes in separate commits; don't collapse everything into a single patch, which makes it hard to review. - Ted