Hi Christophe, [...] > > These should be trivial to fix. The two pertaining to "quoted string > > split across lines" would be something that we might or might not decide > > to do anything about this - technically, as per the Linux kernel coding > > style [1], we ought to fix this... but, this particular case is not > > a terrible example, so I will leave this at your discretion. > > > > What do you think? > > Hi, > I don't think it worth it. > > Even for patch 2/3 about 'seq_printf' --> 'seq_puts' conversion, I'm not > fully convinced myself that is useful. I personally believe it's a good change. For a literal string without any formatting using the seq_printf() is much more involved for no reason, but aside of this small performance improvement, it also has some value in demonstrating the correct usage patterns - people spent more time reading kernel code and looking at how to do things and use things to base their work on, so setting some example is not a bad idea. Albeit, it's a matter of point of view too, I suppose. > Too trivial clean-ups only mess-up 'git blame' for no real added value. Yes, there is a fine line with these. > If you want these clean-ups, I can send a patch for it, but checkpatch > output need sometimes to be ignored on files already in the tree. At least, > this is my point of view. No worries! Thank you for giving it some thought! I appreciate it. :) Krzysztof
