Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl fixes
I've been killing off a *lot* of checkpatch warnings, and I'm probably
getting a tad overzealous. I'll drop these from the patch series next time
I rebase, and avoid doing this in the future. Thanks for the input.
Any suggestions on other checkpatch warnings? Most of what remains are
"don't introduce new typedefs" warnings - should these be removed as well,
or am I safe to leave these? I ask because these changes will be huge, and
are unlikely to improve readability (but I don't know where the kernel
community stands on having billions of typedefs everywhere.
--
Mike Shuey
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Joe Perches <joe(a)perches.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 15:50 -0400, Mike Shuey wrote:
> Fix many checkpatch.pl warnings.
[]
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/acceptor.c
b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/acceptor.c
[]
> @@ -99,38 +99,42 @@ lnet_connect_console_error(int rc, lnet_nid_t
peer_nid,
> switch (rc) {
> /* "normal" errors */
> case -ECONNREFUSED:
> - CNETERR("Connection to %s at host %pI4h on port %d was
refused: check that Lustre is running on that node.\n",
> - libcfs_nid2str(peer_nid),
> - &peer_ip, peer_port);
> + CNETERR(
> + "Connection to %s at host %pI4h on port %d was
refused: check that Lustre is running on that node.\n",
> + libcfs_nid2str(peer_nid), &peer_ip, peer_port);
These are not improvements and checkpatch messages aren't dicta.
Please don't convert code unless the conversion makes it better
for a human reader.
These don't.
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 2.3 KB)