On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:37 -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > This patch is still white spaced damaged.
> Is identical to this chunk with the exception of whitespace. But > curiously, not enough white space to warrant such a large diff. I broke > out ediff-buffers to verify this. Did you reformat this whole region > and then just query-replace the tabs with spaces? I can't see how diff > would generate this chunk otherwise. > > There should be no changes here. I don't mean to be pedantic but it's > extremely difficult to review a patch like this. I suspect it is because I copy/pasted that code from its original location in usb_host_scan() to the new usb_host_scan_dev(), and subsequently did some shuffling about. Could it also be because that hunk has moved both location and containing function? I was trying to figure out in my head how diff would efficiently handle that but gave up :) It looks as if I need to recreate the new source version again manually, making sure the editor doesn't mess with tabs. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
