On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 16:50 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: Hi Joe, thanks for replying.
> On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 22:04 +0200, Eilon Greenstein wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 11:55 -0800, David Rientjes wrote: > > > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Eilon Greenstein wrote: > > > This is fairly common in all the acpi code where variables declared in a > > > function are separated from the code in a function. > > > > > > > Indeed, I see that you do use it in some functions. > > > > Maybe we can limit it only to the networking tree (similar to the > > networking comments style) or if the ACPI is the exception, we can apply > > to all but ACPI. > > I'm not sure this should be done. > Double line spacing has some utility and > is pretty common. Since adding double empty line can cause a patch to be rejected, we should have an easy way to catch it before submitting. > Perhaps make this a --strict/CHK option > and also perhaps make sure this isn't > emitted on consecutive lines. Indeed, CHK makes more sense. I wanted to have a warning per redundant line, but since it can be annoying when adding 3 or more empty lines intentionally, I will issue one comment for consecutive lines. v2 is on its way. Thanks, Eilon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
