Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 03/29] memstick: core: add new functions | From | Maxim Levitsky <> | Date | Tue, 26 Oct 2010 03:20:58 +0200 |
| |
On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 07:56 -0700, Alex Dubov wrote: > --- On Fri, 22/10/10, Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com> wrote: > > > From: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com> > > Subject: [PATCH 03/29] memstick: core: add new functions > > To: "Alex Dubov" <oakad@yahoo.com> > > Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, "LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Maxim Levitsky" <maximlevitsky@gmail.com> > > Received: Friday, 22 October, 2010, 4:53 PM > > Add a lot of support code that will > > be used later. > > > > You're adding here a lot of temporarily dead code, which, while being > useful, should be better added together with the actual driver > functionality. So what? What is wrong with that? Why should I mix things together?
> > Besides this, the patch has a lot of unneeded clean-ups which are better > be set as a separate patch. What cleanups? So I added the memstick_power_off and make code use it If you want even that as separate patch, ok.
And memstick_invalidate_reg_window in memstick_power_on? Again at any rate it will be invalid there. (Maybe I should have put that in memstick_power_off actually, will do)
If you want me to put these changes in separate patches, ok, I do it.
> > And it doesn't conform to the coding guideline either (4 byte indents, > instead of tab What? I checked the patch with checkpatch.pl. It didn't complain. I also use 8 byte tabs not 4. Will look at that, thanks.
Best regards, Maxim Levitsky
| |