On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 11:53:27PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > >> Like I said, there are infinite cleanups or improvements you can make. > >> It does not particularly matter that they happen before or after the > >> scaling work, except if there are classes of APIs that the new locking > >> model can no longer support. > > > > We do plenty of cleanups when changing code when the result gives us > > simpler and easier to understand code. It's a trivial change that, > > IMO, makes the code more consistent and easier to follow. > > Unrelated "cleanups" in the same patch as non trivial locking change > is stupid. So put it in another prepartory patch. It makes the locking changes easier to understand... > Necessary changes to prevent bad ugliness resulting, or preventing > repeated steps for the particular changes, etc. of course. Killing un > related functions no. Ok, I get the picture. You don't want a code review, you want a rubber stamp. Find someone else to get it from. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
