Re: [PATCH] libata: remove dead code from libata-acpi.c

[Aaron Lu]

On 06/21/2013 11:25 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 08:55 +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
>> On 06/20/2013 07:02 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>>> Hello.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for your comments.
>>
>>>
>>> On 20-06-2013 6:26, Aaron Lu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +void ata_acpi_hotplug_init(struct ata_host *host)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	int i;
>>>> +
>>>> +	for (i = 0; i < host->n_ports; i++) {
>>>> +		struct ata_port *ap = host->ports[i];
>>>> +		acpi_handle handle;
>>>> +		struct ata_device *dev;
>>>> +
>>>> +		if (!ap)
>>>> +			continue;
>>>> +
>>>> +		handle = ata_ap_acpi_handle(ap);
>>>> +		if (handle) {
>>>> +			/* we might be on a docking station */
>>>> +			register_hotplug_dock_device(handle,
>>>> +					&ata_acpi_ap_dock_ops, ap);
>>>
>>>     Please indent this line under the next character after ( above.
>>
>> Is there a link about this rule? I might have missed something about
>> coding style.
> 
> The rule is follow the coding style in the file, unless there's
> something really wrong with it (which there might be in the case of
> really old drivers).  The reason is that a mixture of coding styles
> makes the file much harder to read than a single consistent style.

Oh right, that's the rule I missed. Thanks for letting me know.

> 
> In this case, if you look at libata-acpi.c you see all continuation
> lines of function calls are aligned with open braces.

Indeed.

-Aaron
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/