Re: [PATCH] fs: aio: fixed purely styling errors

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Salih MSA <salihmahmoudsahmed@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: aio: fixed purely styling errors
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 13:53:32 +0000
Cc: viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-aio@xxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Salih MSA <salih.msa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20220307082257.582466-1-salih.msa@outlook.com>

On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 08:22:57AM +0000, Salih MSA wrote:
> Mostly clarified unsigned -> unsigned int.
> Also separated declarations from functionality.

Please don't.  Why did you think this patch would be a good idea?
What could we write somewhere that would have dissuaded you from sending
this patch?

References:
- [PATCH] fs: aio: fixed purely styling errors
  - From: Salih MSA

Prev by Date: Re: Buffered I/O broken on s390x with page faults disabled (gfs2)
Next by Date: Re: Buffered I/O broken on s390x with page faults disabled (gfs2)
Previous by thread: [PATCH] fs: aio: fixed purely styling errors
Next by thread: [PATCH 5.16 050/186] binfmt_elf: Avoid total_mapping_size for ET_EXEC
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Ext4 Filesystem] [Union Filesystem] [Filesystem Testing] [Ceph Users] [Ecryptfs] [NTFS 3] [AutoFS] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux Cachefs] [Reiser Filesystem] [Linux RAID] [NTFS 3] [Samba] [Device Mapper] [CEPH Development]

Powered by Linux