Dave Jones <s.dave.jo...@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 09:56:00AM -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote: >> >> Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> writes: >> > On Sun, 2016-10-30 at 19:02 -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote: >> >> Code is 80 characters wide, and comments are /* */ never the ugly C++ >> >> crap. >> > >> > You might look at the recent Linus Torvalds authored commit >> > 5e467652ffef (?printk: re-organize log_output() to be more legible") >> > which does both of those: c99 // comments and > 80 columns. >> > >> > Absolutes are for zealots. >> >> What Linus does in his code, is totally up to him. What I pull into the >> driver that *I* maintain, is up to me. It is perfectly normal to expect >> submitters to respect the coding style of the piece of code they are >> trying to edit. > > Bullshit. It's perfectly normal to respect Linux coding style described in > Documentation/CodingStyle. Now let's back to the topic, could you > apply John's patch or you just wanna improve your driver is 100% bug free?
First of all, I call for proper CodingStyle to be applied to my driver, and I expect someone posting a patch to respect the codingstyle of the driver in question. It is simple respect for the code. If you consider that BS - that is on you! Second I am NOT applying that patch as I have stated repeatedly because I am not convinced it is safe to do so and it changes the code flow for one type of chip and not the rest. In addition it uses a broken approach to doing chip specific changes. In short, the patch is broken! Jes
