On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 02:12:28PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2017-12-12 at 08:43 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 09, 2017 at 09:00:18AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Sat, 2017-12-09 at 09:36 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > 1. Using lockdep_set_novalidate_class() for anything other > > > > than device->mutex will throw checkpatch warnings. Nice. (*) > > > [] > > > > (*) checkpatch.pl is considered mostly harmful round here, too, > > > > but that's another rant.... > > > > > > How so? > > > > Short story is that it barfs all over the slightly non-standard > > coding style used in XFS. > [] > > This sort of stuff is just lowest-common-denominator noise - great > > for new code and/or inexperienced developers, but not for working > > with large bodies of existing code with slightly non-standard > > conventions. > > Completely reasonable. Thanks. > > Do you get many checkpatch submitters for fs/xfs? We used to. Not recently, though. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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>
