Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] SCHED_EDF scheduling class | From | Daniel Walker <> | Date | Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:24:05 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 18:12 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 09/23/2009 06:08 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > >> Not true, you want to address the major issues first. What's the point > >> of fixing whitespace if the whole approach is rejected? if it has to > >> undergo a rewrite? (not an opinion on EDF btw, just as an example) > >> > > I'm not sure why your fixated on whitespace , but thinking about it more > > I don't think it matters .. If you fix whitespace or major issues first, > > it doesn't matter .. All the issues have to eventually get fixed .. Not > > to mentioned that LKML is not something you could remotely control in > > that way. > > > > A technical issue is that if you rewrite the code the whitespace fix > becomes irrelevant. But more important is that it's a distraction when > people are thinking about requirements and design.
It's not irrelevant, since a person doing that rewrite will be conscience of whitespace during the re-write ..
The same with general coding style, if someone does a rewrite who has been alerted to checkpatch problems they will likely use it themselves leaving no need for someone else to comment on it.
> >>> In this case the author is not totally aware of how to submit this > >>> code.. I don't think it's at all inappropriate to comment on that. His > >>> next submission will likely be much cleaner and nicer. It may even speed > >>> up the inclusion process since he'll be more easily able to submit the > >>> code (with practice and comments from us). > >>> > >>> > >> Give people some credit. > >> > > What do you mean? > > > > > > If he's able to write a scheduling class, he'll pick up the coding style > when it becomes relevant.
There's plenty of large projects that never get off the ground cause people don't follow the coding style, or don't write clean code.. Take a look at the staging tree there's plenty of large dirty projects in there.
Daniel
| |