On 2/28/16 07:14, Jiri Kosina wrote:

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016, Chen Gang wrote:

quoted

quoted

Mel, as an MM developer, has already NACK'ed the patch, which means
you should not send the patch to **any** upstream maintainer for
inclusion.

I don't think I "should not ...". I only care about correctness and
contribution, I don't care about any members ideas and their thinking.
When we have different ideas or thinking, we need discuss.

If by "discuss" you mean "30+ email thread about where to put a line 
break", please drop me from CC next time this discussion is going to 
happen. Thanks.

Excuse me, when I sent this patch, I did not know who I shall send to, I
have to reference to "./scripts/get_maintainer.pl".

If any members have no time to care about it (every members' time are
really expensive), please let me know (can reply directly).

Thanks.

quoted

For common shared header files, for me, we should really take more care
about the coding styles.

 - If the common shared header files don't care about the coding styles,
   I guess any body files will have much more excuses for "do not care
   about coding styles".

 - That means our kernel whole source files need not care about coding
   styles at all!!

 - It is really really VERY BAD!!

If someone only dislike me to send the related patches, I suggest: Let
another member(s) "run checkpatch -file" on the whole "./include" sub-
directory, and fix all coding styles issues.

Which is exactly what you shouldn't do.

For me, I also guess, I am not the suitable member to do that (in fact,
I dislike to do like that - "run checkpath -file" on "./include").

The ultimate goal of the Linux kernel is not 100% strict complicance to 
the CodingStyle document no matter what. The ultimate goal is to have a 
kernel that is under control. By polluting git blame, you are taking on 
aspect of the "under control" away.

Yes, the ultimate goal of CodingStyle is to have a kernel that is under
control.

For me, most of files in "./include" are common, simple, and shared
files, which are not quite related with code analyzing (e.g. git log -p,
or git blame), but they are read by others in most times. Is it correct?

Common sense needs to be used; horribly terrible coding style needs to be 
fixed, sure. Is 82-characters long line horribly terrible coding style? 
No, it's not.

For me, what you said above have effect on body files (in kernel, at
least, more than 95% source files are body files, I guess).

But in "./include", most of files are the interface inside and outside
of our kernel, we need take more care about their coding styles.

I often use vertical split window in vim in full screen mode to reading
source code, when I read c source files, I often split window vertically
for the related header files as reference.


Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang (e??a??)

Managing Natural Environments is the Duty of Human Beings.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>