Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move
This was done to conform to the Lustre Coding Guidelines. -Ben On 12/10/16, 1:14 PM, "Greg Kroah-Hartman" wrote: >On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 01:05:59PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: >> From: Ben Evans >> >> It was found if you sort the headers alphabetically >> that it reduced patch conflicts. This patch sorts >> the headers alphabetically and also place linux >> header first, then uapi header and finally the >> lustre kernel headers. > >I still don't agree, when did you last have a patch conflict with this >file in the .h section? And exactly how hard was it to fix it up? > >I'm all for cleanups, but really, this is useless. And I said so the >last time you sent it... > >greg k-h ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move
On 12/12/16, 11:34 AM, "Greg Kroah-Hartman" wrote: >What is this mythical guidelines, and why does it differ from the kernel >source ones? > >And again, why is this patch required? > >thanks, > >greg k-h > Here are the general guidelines for your reading pleasure: http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Coding_Style_Guidelines The specific guidelines on organizing #includes are here: http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Style_Guide_Includes -Ben Evans ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
Re:
I've been working off and on with this. Since you're getting into the counters in a couple of the patches, part of the reason for all the #defines here are because MDC, MDT and OST counters are all shoved into the same array dynamically, sometimes. It would be a much cleaner approach to have a separate array for the MDC stats, then print them conditionally. This would reduce all of the calls to these macros to counter increments. -Ben Evans On 1/11/18, 12:16 PM, "Fabian Huegel" wrote: >We cleaned up a lot of checkpatch errors and warnings in obd_class.h, >but there are still some CHECKs and two warnings about flow control >inside macros left. > >Changing those macros to inline functions would probably >be a good idea, unfortunatly it's not straightforward since they use >'#op' to print the name of the operation. > >We also did some aligning to make the code more readable and removed >an unnecessary macro. > >We only tested, that the kernel still compiles and the lustre kernel >module loads successfully, but given the harmless nature of these >changes we don't expect any problems. > >The patches are based on the staging-testing branch of the staging tree. > ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
