On 03/26/2012 12:43 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 17:35, Anthony Liguori<anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
On 03/26/2012 12:09 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 02:06, Wanpeng Li<l...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
From: Anthony Liguori<aligu...@us.ibm.com>
This series aggressively refactors the PC machine initialization to be
more
modelled and less ad-hoc. The highlights of this series are:
Please fix coding style while moving.
I disagree. That makes reviewing the movement and rebasing the movement
pretty difficult.
Yes, a separate step would be nice.
If we were to fix the issues, it should before or after. But in that
context, I think it makes it orthogonal to moving the code and should be
treated independently.
I'd fix the style in the first patch, then perform moves etc. That way
no patch would add noncompliant code, only remove.
Is this something we universally want to do? What would we do about patches to
audio?
I'd prefer not to go down this road. Let's keep discussion of fixing
CODING_STYLE of existing code separate from rearchitecting/enhancing code.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
