Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 19:41 +, James Simmons wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 17:34 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
[]
> > http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Style_Guide_Includes
> > 
> > There is no single mandated code style for this.
> > Some people like reverse christmas tree.
> > 
> > Whatever...
> > 
> Sigh, Sayre's law.



> I went looking to see what the offical
> policy is for this and found nothing. If this is really 
> important can we then place an offical policy on how
> headers are added to a C file in CodingStyle and add
> something to checkpatch to detect incorrect patches.
> Lets burn down this bike shed once and for all. 

g'luck with that.

David Miller might like to have a word with you too.

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 19:41 +, James Simmons wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 17:34 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
[]
> > http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Style_Guide_Includes
> > 
> > There is no single mandated code style for this.
> > Some people like reverse christmas tree.
> > 
> > Whatever...
> > 
> Sigh, Sayre's law.



> I went looking to see what the offical
> policy is for this and found nothing. If this is really 
> important can we then place an offical policy on how
> headers are added to a C file in CodingStyle and add
> something to checkpatch to detect incorrect patches.
> Lets burn down this bike shed once and for all. 

g'luck with that.

David Miller might like to have a word with you too.

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[James Simmons]

> On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 17:34 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > A: Top-posting.
> > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> > 
> > A: No.
> > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> > 
> > http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 02:42:29PM +, Ben Evans wrote:
> > > This was done to conform to the Lustre Coding Guidelines.
> > 
> > What is this mythical guidelines, and why does it differ from the kernel
> > source ones?
> 
> It's not like it's hard to find
> http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Coding_Style_Guidelines
> 
> And in specific:
> http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Style_Guide_Includes
> 
> There is no single mandated code style for this.
> Some people like reverse christmas tree.
> 
> Whatever...
> 

Sigh, Sayre's law. I went looking to see what the offical
policy is for this and found nothing. If this is really 
important can we then place an offical policy on how
headers are added to a C file in CodingStyle and add
something to checkpatch to detect incorrect patches.
Lets burn down this bike shed once and for all. 

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[James Simmons]

> On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 17:34 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > A: Top-posting.
> > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> > 
> > A: No.
> > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> > 
> > http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 02:42:29PM +, Ben Evans wrote:
> > > This was done to conform to the Lustre Coding Guidelines.
> > 
> > What is this mythical guidelines, and why does it differ from the kernel
> > source ones?
> 
> It's not like it's hard to find
> http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Coding_Style_Guidelines
> 
> And in specific:
> http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Style_Guide_Includes
> 
> There is no single mandated code style for this.
> Some people like reverse christmas tree.
> 
> Whatever...
> 

Sigh, Sayre's law. I went looking to see what the offical
policy is for this and found nothing. If this is really 
important can we then place an offical policy on how
headers are added to a C file in CodingStyle and add
something to checkpatch to detect incorrect patches.
Lets burn down this bike shed once and for all. 

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Ben Evans]

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

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Ben Evans]

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

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 17:34 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> 
> A: No.
> Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> 
> http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> 
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 02:42:29PM +, Ben Evans wrote:
> > This was done to conform to the Lustre Coding Guidelines.
> 
> What is this mythical guidelines, and why does it differ from the kernel
> source ones?

It's not like it's hard to find
http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Coding_Style_Guidelines

And in specific:
http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Style_Guide_Includes

There is no single mandated code style for this.
Some people like reverse christmas tree.

Whatever...

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 17:34 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> 
> A: No.
> Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> 
> http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> 
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 02:42:29PM +, Ben Evans wrote:
> > This was done to conform to the Lustre Coding Guidelines.
> 
> What is this mythical guidelines, and why does it differ from the kernel
> source ones?

It's not like it's hard to find
http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Coding_Style_Guidelines

And in specific:
http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Style_Guide_Includes

There is no single mandated code style for this.
Some people like reverse christmas tree.

Whatever...

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?

http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 02:42:29PM +, Ben Evans wrote:
> This was done to conform to the Lustre Coding Guidelines.

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

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?

http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 02:42:29PM +, Ben Evans wrote:
> This was done to conform to the Lustre Coding Guidelines.

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

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Ben Evans]

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

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Ben Evans]

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

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

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

Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] staging: lustre: headers: sort headers affected by obdo move

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

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