On 10/20/2010 06:07 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 20:53 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:34:18PM -0400, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 20:29 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>>> There are several lines longer than 80 characters. >>>> Does this rule no longer apply ? >>> 80 columns isn't checked for printk format strings. >> Interesting. >>> A kernel general preference may be to keep formats as >>> a single string without line breaks so that grep works >>> better. >>>> Oddly enough, there are only four checkpatch warnings about long lines, >>>> even though there are many more. >>> The version I use doesn't show any warnings. >> checkpatch.pl from both v2.6.36-rc7 and v2.6.36-rc6 do report warnings. >> Looks like those versions flag long lines for pr_warn. Is your version >> older or newer ? > > Newer. It adds pr_warn to the exempted list, not just pr_warning. > >> Anyway, would it be possible to split the patch into one patch per file ? > > Oh sure. It's trivial to do that. > >> I don't know how Jean thinks about it, but in my opinion it would be cleaner, >> permit revert on a single patch/file instead of having to revert the entire series, >> it would simplify review, and it would make it much easier to cherry-pick >> pieces into other releases if needed. > > Jean, do you have a preference? > I'll resubmit if you want it separated. Yes please, that would be nice. Thanks, Henrik _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
