On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 22:29 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 19:17:08 +0200
> Joe Eloff <kagen101@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > >From e23e19537c4d62bc76ae982859d3c3225a45d9c2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > >2001
> > From: Joe Eloff <kagen101@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:13:28 +0200
> > Subject: [PATCH] Staging: et131x: fix coding style issues in
> > et131x_initpci.c
> >
> > This is a patch to the et131x_initpci.c file that fixes up all the
> > line lengths over 80 by the checkpatch.pl tool.
>
> That is one area where checkpatch can be misleading. If you split
> messages like that it becomes hard to grep for them.
>
> Where it is useful is where you have
>
> printk("blah blah bah blah [120 chars]", functioncall(foo))
>
> and it would hide things like functioncall(foo)
>
> No argument about the comment ones however.
Noted and understand why you would want to grep and output when
debugging.
Will make better judgement calls thanks to these messages.
Regards,
Joe
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
