From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0742C50 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 09:56:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C5A419CF21; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 07:56:05 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 1C5A419CF21 Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=jfreimann@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 1C5A419CF21 Received: from localhost (dhcp-192-218.str.redhat.com [10.33.192.218]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA75A17981; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 07:56:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 09:56:01 +0200 From: Jens Freimann To: Tiwei Bie Cc: "Van Haaren, Harry" , "thomas@monjalon.net" , "dev@dpdk.org" Message-ID: <20170720075601.cbuizcbke5svgsos@dhcp-192-218.str.redhat.com> References: <1500455196-182365-1-git-send-email-tiwei.bie@intel.com> <20170719102321.GA6991@debian-ZGViaWFuCg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170719102321.GA6991@debian-ZGViaWFuCg> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170714 (1.8.3) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Thu, 20 Jul 2017 07:56:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] all: refactor coding style X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 07:56:06 -0000 On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 06:23:21PM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote: >On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 05:24:38PM +0800, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: [...] >> Hi Tiwei, >> >> Although the idea and motivation for code-cleanup are good, performing >> large cleanup across a code-base is not a good solution. The reason that >> these types of cleanups (or even re-formatting the entire codebase) are not >> performed often is that it "invalidates" any currently-in-progress patch-sets. >> As a result, more work is required from many contributors to rebase useful >> features due to across-the-board white-space cleanups. >> >> Just expressing concern that we need to think carefully about the impacts >> of such a patch. >> > >Yeah, I agree. Such patch may cause many conflicts. But this patch >is almost generated automatically, that is to say, it's a quick work. >And it's more like some fixes (for the bad coding style) rather than >silly re-formatting done by `indent'. So I just want to share it with >the community, and see the potential feedbacks. Thank you for your >comments! :) what I'm more concerned about with these kind of huge clean-ups is that it makes git-blame less useful for me. Next time I want to look up who changed this line I'll just find your cleanup patch. Then I have to do another step to find out which commit introduced the change I'm looking for. I'm more for cleaning up these things next time you do a semantic change in this code. regards, Jens