* Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 09:45:36AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 11/25/24 12:31 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > > - if (relocatable_kernel)
> > > > - runtime_start = align_up(load_address, kernel_alignment)
> > > > - else
> > > > - runtime_start = pref_address
> > > > + if ( relocatable_kernel ) {
> > > > + if ( load_address < pref_address )
> > >
> > > What's up with the extra spaces around ( and ) ... and inconsistent with
> > > the lines below?
>
> I can remove them. This file has a lot of inconsistencies it seems...
Feel free to send a followup patch that fixes up all of those other
details and harmonizes the style. Quality of the boot protocol
documentation demonstrably matters quite a bit in functional terms as
well ...
>
> > Also, even pseudocode should follow the kernel's coding style and use
> > tabs in particular - which it already does in (some...) other places of
> > this document, such as the 'Sample Boot Configuration' chapter.
>
> The problem is that reStructuredText syntax requires that indentation.
> I may follow the rules after the rST requirements, though.
That's a good solution - thank you!
Ingo
