On 6/15/07, Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Good idea... Am I asking too much to have separate things in separate
patches? It makes review easier.
...yeah I got a little bit carried away after the refactoring. I will
spin the refactoring out into a separate patch and handle the coding
Sorry for not getting to this soon...
On Tuesday June 12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> From: Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Most of the raid5 code predates git so the coding style violations have
> been present for a long time. However, now that major new patches are
> arriving, checkpat
On 6/14/07, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
When you are ready for wider testing, if you have a patch against a
released kernel it makes testing easy, characteristics are pretty well
known already.
Thanks I went ahead and put a separate snapshot up on SourceForge:
http://downloads.sour
Dan Williams wrote:
In other words, it seemed like a good idea at the time, but I am open
to suggestions.
I went ahead and added the cleanup patch to the front of the
git-md-accel.patch series. A few more whitespace cleanups, but no
major changes from what I posted earlier. The new rebased s
In other words, it seemed like a good idea at the time, but I am open
to suggestions.
I went ahead and added the cleanup patch to the front of the
git-md-accel.patch series. A few more whitespace cleanups, but no
major changes from what I posted earlier. The new rebased series is
still passin
> I assume that you're prepared to repair all that damage to your tree, but
> it seems a bit masochistic?
It's either this or have an inconsistent coding style throughout
raid5.c. I figure it is worth it to have reduced code duplication
between raid5 and raid6, and it makes it easier to add new
> From: Andrew Morton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Unfortunately these cleanups get into a huge fight with your very own
> git-md-accel.patch:
>
Yes, you missed the note that said:
Note, I have not rebased git-md-accel yet. While that is
happening I
wanted to have this patch out f
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:41:03 -0700
Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Most of the raid5 code predates git so the coding style violations have
> been present for a long time. However, now that major new patches are
> arriving, checkpatch.pl complains about these old violations. Instead of
