On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:26:02PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote: > > As for coding style, actually IMHO this patch is even _not_ a coding > > style, more like a code shuffle, indeed. > > > > "80 column limitation" is about coding style, I guess, all of us agree > with it. No, it's been accepted that checkpatch requiring people to reformat code to within be 80 columns limitation was actively harmful, and it no longer does that. Worse, it now complains when you split a printf string across lines, so there were patches that split a string across multiple lines to make checkpatch shut up. And now there are patches that join the string back together. And if you now start submitting patches to split them up again because you think the 80 column restriction is so darned important, that would be even ***more*** code churn. Which is one of the reasons why some of us aren't terribly happy with people who start running checkpatch -file on other people's code and start submitting patches, either through the trivial patch portal or not. Mel, as an MM developer, has already NACK'ed the patch, which means you should not send the patch to **any** upstream maintainer for inclusion. - Ted -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>