On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 04:27:06PM +0530, Srikrishan Malik wrote: > This patch set is aimed at removing checkpatch issues from files in > lustre/lustre/mdc. > > Is it ok if I just fix those in this set and post another patch set > to take care of other issues identified in review? checkpatch fixes are worthless if they don't make the code better for human readers. > > - removing typedef for ldlm_policy_data_t will touch many other > files/dirs which were not initially targeted for this patch set. Yeah. You're right. This should be done in a separate patch because it doesn't completely fall under the "cleanup variable declarations in mdc_enqueue()" header. > - There can be a separate patch to remove __u64. It's all part of the same thing "variable declarations in that function." regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
