On 10/27/16 09:58, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 10/27/16 05:47, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:58 PM, <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> I prefer to leave the prefixes and this is getting into pointless churn. >>> >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/of/resolver.c | 10 +++++----- >>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>> >> >> If I was just submitting this as a single patch, I would agree. >> >> But since I am making so many other changes, I think it makes >> sense to do this as part of this series. It is broken apart >> as a separate patch to be easy to review and not pollute any >> of the other patches in the series. >> >> The prefixes add no value for a local function, but they do >> add noise when reading code. > > The value is when reading the calling function, you know the function > is a DT related function. You don't know it's a static function It is more than that. A common convention in drivers/of/ is that function blah() acquires a lock, calls function __blah(), and releases the lock. Any function other than blah() that wants to call __blah() must also hold the proper lock. The functions whose name this patch changes do not fit this pattern. > without looking up the function name. That said, I wouldn't object to > code originally written either way, I just don't see the value in > changing it. > > Rob > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
