2009/10/27 Artyom Tarasenko <atar4q...@googlemail.com>: > 2009/10/27 Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws>: >> Artyom Tarasenko wrote: >>> >>> According to SCSI-2 specification, >>> http://ldkelley.com/SCSI2/SCSI2/SCSI2/SCSI2-08.html#8.2.5 , >>> "if the allocation length of the command descriptor block (CDB) is too >>> small to transfer >>> all of the parameters, the additional length shall not be adjusted to >>> reflect the truncation." >>> The 36 mandatory bytes of response are written to outbuf, and then >>> only the length requested >>> in CDB is transferred. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Artyom Tarasenko <atar4q...@gmail.com> >>> >> >> This patch is whitespace damaged. > > Also the attached one? I tried to keep the original indentation: used > tabs where the tabs originally were.
What is actually the indentation policy for patches? Should they be conform with CODING_STYLE even if the original code isn't? If they are conform the code may look badly indented with any tab settings, including the ones from the original author. If they keep author's indentation, the code still may look badly indented with the CODING_STYLE tab settings. Should patches for badly indented code explicitly require indentation-only patches which shall be applied before?
