OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
From: David Gibson (hermes_at_gibson.dropbear.id.au)
Date: Tue Jul 30 2002 - 20:32:20 CDT

  • Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

    On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 11:48:41AM +0200, Joerg Dorchain wrote:
    > On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 11:38:03AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
    > > >
    > > > The patch is appended. You can also find it at
    > > > http://dorchain.net/~joerg/code/orinoco_plx-patch_for_pheecom
    > > >
    > > > If you have more questions about this patch, just ask me.
    > >
    > > Argh. When you're making patches, for crying out loud, *please* don't
    > > make changes unrelated to what you're trying to accomplish. You've
    > > changed a whole lot of the indentation in the code, making vast
    > > amounts of suprious diff. Don't do that, if you have any wish for the
    > > patch to be applied. Or indeed looked at.

    > Sorry that this now goes into a style discussion. Maybe you can help me
    > by telling what your preferred way is.

    See Documentation/CodingStyle in the kernel source.

    > The reason for changing identication of many lines is an if clause:
    > if ((pdev->vendor != 0x15e8) && (pdev->device != 0x0131)) {
    > /* Not the card that needs special handling, so the known working code
    > goes here */

    Ok, sorry, it's not quite as bad as I thought. But this highlights
    part of the point - I missed the extra if statements in your patch
    because your indentation doesn't match mine.

    > I was thinking that if-block should be idented, even when submitting
    > patches. I don't see many chances to deliver equivalent functionality
    > without this case distinction.

    Yes - but you should match the indentation style of the code you're
    changing. In this case 1 tab (8 space) indents.

    > I have no idea in what form you like to see this patch. A chance would be
    > to move code into a init_plx_chip function, then I could add a
    > init_tmd_chip function with less line, but altogether the diff for this
    > is even longer.

    How similar are the PLX and TMD chips really? Is it worth putting
    support into the same module, or should we create a new orinoco_tmd.c
    with support for the TMD chips?

    -- 
    David Gibson			| For every complex problem there is a
    davidgibson.dropbear.id.au	| solution which is simple, neat and
    				| wrong.
    http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson