[ewg] RE: [ PATCH 3/3 ] RDMA/nes SFP+ cleanup
Glenn Streiff
gstreiff at NetEffect.com
Tue Apr 29 10:23:58 PDT 2008
> > > Clean up the SFP+ patch.
> >
> > Why send a patch and then immediately a cleanup? Why not
> > just clean the
> > original patch?
> >
> > > - if ((nesadapter->OneG_Mode) &&
> > (nesadapter->phy_type[mac_index] != NES_PHY_TYPE_PUMA_1G)) {
> > > + if ((nesadapter->OneG_Mode) && (nesadapter->phy_type[
> > mac_index ] != NES_PHY_TYPE_PUMA_1G)) {
> >
> > This type of change isn't a cleanup... kernel style prefers
> >
> > array[index]
> >
> > to
> >
> > array[ index ]
> >
> > and it seems most of this patch is making the change to the
> > less-good way?
> >
> > - R.
> >
>
> My bad, on the array index idiom. I can redo.
>
> With regard to post patch clean-ups, I recall you telling me
> that is was preferred to either front-load or back-load the
> cleanups in a patch series.
>
> I generally "cleaned-up" the entire functions rather than
> just the patched portion. If I do both together, then you'll
> get clean-up noise interspersed with functional deltas making
> functional review somewhat annoying in my opinion.
>
Hmm...what I probably should of done was given a clean sfp-patch
and then add peripheral cleanups to the functions as a subsequent
patch. I'll go down that page.
Glenn
More information about the ewg
mailing list