Re: platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi: Adjustments for four function implementations

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

 



> I understand it can be frustrating to encounter different policies
> across kernel maintainers.

The change acceptance is varying for special transformation patterns.


> You'll even run in to this with maintainers of the same subsystem
> from time to time.

Interesting, isn't it?


> I'm supportive of cleaning up old code in general,

Nice.


> and we routinely apply such patches as these developed with cocci.

Good to know …


> 1. This is init code )so any space savings is short lived)

Would you dare to achieve another small improvement there?


> So it isn't that we place a low value on coding style guidelines,
> but rather we place higher value on not perturbing code

I can follow this view in principle.


> we can't fully test without a demonstrable functional reasons to do so.

How do you think about to get a bit nicer run time characteristics?

Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux