On Thursday, April 14, 2011 01:58:32 Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Le 14/04/2011 01:30, Mike Frysinger a écrit :
On Wednesday, April 13, 2011 16:23:20 Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
btw. I suspect the change is to keep checkpatch.pl happy about the line length.
also, checkpatch is a tool in the toolbox. people should not be blindly following it, but reviewing its output to see what should be changed and which should be ignored.
if checkpatch is complaining about code that you arent changing, then you probably shouldnt worry about it. especially when the only thing you're doing is changing style.
I tend to see this "don't worry about some checkpatch.pl messages" appraoch as similar to "don't worry about some C compiler warnings". in that indeed "you probably shouldn't worry about it", and the key is "probably": when it bites you back later on, you realize you "probably" should have worried. If you apply a zero-C-warning policy, then a zero-checkpatch-warning policy makes sense as well...
how about when it's plain wrong ? or it's applying a rule that (most of the time) is correct, but not *all* the time ? or it complains about code that your patch isnt touching (as is the case here) ? or it complains about code that is being imported (from linux or other projects) ?
so i stand by my statement that checkpatch is a tool and does *not* get the final say. blindly following a tool is good -- if you're blind. -mike