Re: [PATCH] fasync: Use tabs instead of spaces in code indent

[Wen Gu]

On 2021/11/10 6:58 pm, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-11-10 at 14:29 +0800, Wen Gu wrote:
> > When I investigated about fasync_list in SMC network subsystem,
> > I happened to find that here uses spaces instead of tabs in code
> > indent and fix this by the way.
> >
> > Fixes: f7347ce4ee7c ("fasync: re-organize fasync entry insertion to
> > allow it under a spinlock")
> > Signed-off-by: Wen Gu <guwen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Tony Lu <tonylu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   fs/fcntl.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/fcntl.c b/fs/fcntl.c
> > index 9c6c6a3..36ba188 100644
> > --- a/fs/fcntl.c
> > +++ b/fs/fcntl.c
> > @@ -927,7 +927,7 @@ void fasync_free(struct fasync_struct *new)
> >    */
> >   struct fasync_struct *fasync_insert_entry(int fd, struct file *filp, struct fasync_struct **fapp, struct fasync_struct *new)
> >   {
> > -        struct fasync_struct *fa, **fp;
> > +	struct fasync_struct *fa, **fp;
> >   
> >   	spin_lock(&filp->f_lock);
> >   	spin_lock(&fasync_lock);
>
> Hi Wen,
>
> I usually don't take patches that just fix whitespace like this. The
> reason is that these sorts of patches tend to make backporting difficult
> as they introduce merge conflicts for no good reason.
>
> When you're making substantial changes in an area, then please do go
> ahead and fix up whitespace in the same area, but patches that just fix
> up whitespace are more trouble than they are worth.
>
> Sorry,

Thank you for the reminding. I didn't realize my unintentional action 
would bring trouble to the backport. I will keep this in mind.

Thanks,
Wen Gu