From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752056AbcAEPPK (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:15:10 -0500 Received: from iolanthe.rowland.org ([192.131.102.54]:60038 "HELO iolanthe.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751487AbcAEPPI (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:15:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:15:07 -0500 (EST) From: Alan Stern X-X-Sender: stern@iolanthe.rowland.org To: "Geyslan G. Bem" cc: LKML , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/17] usb: host: ehci-dbg: refactor fill_periodic_buffer function In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 4 Jan 2016, Geyslan G. Bem wrote: > 2016-01-04 18:01 GMT-03:00 Alan Stern : > > On Mon, 4 Jan 2016, Geyslan G. Bem wrote: > > > >> This patch fixes a coding style issue reported by checkpatch related to > >> many leading tabs, removing a 'do while' loop and making use of goto tag instead. > > > > This is highly questionable. It's a big amount of code churn, nearly > > impossible to verify visually, just to remove one level of indentation. > > It also introduces an unnecessary backwards "goto", which seems like a > > bad idea. > After hear you I agree. I saw that others drivers uses similar > structure (fotg210-hcd.c and ohci-dbg.c), but they have less code. It > would be the case in this file of moving code to a new function? If > not, please disregard this patch. Moving code into a new sub-function would be okay. BTW, you don't need to post these patches to both linux-usb and LKML. linux-usb alone is good enough. Nothing about the patches would be especially interesting to a general Linux kernel programmer, so there's no point in bringing them to everybody's attention. Alan Stern