Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 3 Jul 2009 17:42:09 +0200 | | From | Ingo Molnar <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] vt: add an event interface |
* Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > It's an argument you made on false premises. > > > > The thing is, my review wasnt about old code being moved around. It > > was about new code being introduced by you: > > Ingo, if you've nothing better to do than quote out of context and > be offensive, perhaps you should go fix voyager support or > something productive instead. > > The reply section you are quoting was about the code that was > moved from place to place. I stand by that comment - you don't > move code from place to place and reformat, rework it in one go. > It's lousy engineering.
Your claim is simply false on its face. This commit:
| commit a6614999e800cf3a134ce93ea46ef837e3c0e76e | Author: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com> | Date: Fri Jan 2 13:46:50 2009 +0000 | | tty: Introduce some close helpers for ports
did not 'move' the piece of code i quoted around:
+ if( tty->count == 1 && port->count != 1) { + printk(KERN_WARNING + "tty_port_close_start: tty->count = 1 port count = %d.\n", + port->count); + port->count = 1; + } + if (--port->count < 0) { + printk(KERN_WARNING "tty_port_close_start: count = %d\n", + port->count); + port->count = 0; + } it introduces it. This line:
+ if( tty->count == 1 && port->count != 1) { can be found nowhere else in the commit. You added it.
In fact, if one looks closer, it turns out that:
$ git log -p -1 a6614999e800cf3a134ce93ea46ef837e3c0e76e | grep -iE 'if.*tty->count' - if (tty->count == 1 && port->port.count != 1) { - if (tty->count == 1 && port->count != 1) - if ((tty->count == 1) && (info->port.count != 1)) { - if ((tty->count == 1) && (port->port.count != 1)) { - if (tty->count == 1 && port->count != 1) - if ((tty->count == 1) && (info->port.count != 1)) { - if ((tty->count == 1) && (info->port.count != 1)) { - if ((tty->count == 1) && (info->port.count != 1)) { + if( tty->count == 1 && port->count != 1) { that you consolidate 8 separate pieces of code, all of which got this basic detail right, and you _introduced_ the uncleanliness.
Ingo
|  |