On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 08:45:48PM -0400, Kenneth R Westerback wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 04:12:20AM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 02:50:54AM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:42:35PM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 05:40:37PM +0400, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > Paul Irofti proposed to split the diff in a few easy steps. > > > > > Step 1 - merge drivers pms and pmsi. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Step 2 - cleanup, standardization of interfaces and preparation > > > > for easy addition of new devices. Now the resume of work in polling > > > > mode. > > > > > > > > > > Regen for -current. Also small improvements: > > > 1) add function pms_dev_reset() > > > 2) in struct pms_protocol add function sync() - for check synchronization, > > > proc () - for processing packet. > > > > > > > That diff is way too big to commit in one piece. I'll try to split it into > > several pieces. > > > > Pieces 1 - cleanup code > > > > -- > > Alexandr Shadchin > > All the return (); -> return ; just clutters the diff up. I don't > see the point since both are considered valid style. I think the > ansification is a valid change but that should be an easy separate > diff. Many of the other changes seem to be whitespace because I > can't see any real changes. I would recommend avoiding such changes > while you are attempting to make functional changes, unless the > code is really hard to read. I don't see that here. > > The smaller and more focused the diff, the easier to read and more > likely to get commentary. We like single purpose diffs. :-). > > .... Ken >
Ok. I'll try to make small diff, which will not include unrelated changes. -- Alexandr Shadchin