From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S932939AbcIEKk4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 5 Sep 2016 06:40:56 -0400
Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]:50905 "EHLO mout.web.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S932249AbcIEKky (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 5 Sep 2016 06:40:54 -0400
Subject: Re: s390/debug: Fine-tuning for several function implementations
To: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net>
 <e4359dc9-9e20-e33b-9743-9ebade853268@users.sourceforge.net>
 <20160905123103.2c587d60@mschwide>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
        David Hildenbrand <dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <2e09585e-1ffd-4301-13a5-2792da0078b2@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 12:40:38 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160905123103.2c587d60@mschwide>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:XR2y3gofGw5HS1MaZG0+DH9sDPP89Huhh7GzWGwZp+/WRau6lHO
 pM1/A6uYUkWOoCklPo5utV+7jpM/Vne3+p/0N5dJOy/ZM5VAY1EJ/tSsgDpne4TwDfhLnnc
 S7M++LltVbSn7w9piIUa01vbDjpK1dNOe+u54thfaTcJMekvUe3j7ml+9JRk4NhzTVmOrUh
 ewMejMWaOufrmt5KsAlAA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:FYJy+NNU6GI=:1mfVF5ws0j8F8PL1emjzLw
 tLvx6wWB2jGyOe+buACO6L+/b0eoddaXDdc/gQgChQiNieJ2OF8VV4APx8KJdWwFQyT3oxn8u
 d5VCPHTIOb8T3yDwlcvpSXGxyE3lRKdq0FfW6SbLt9HGvyApgls0PI4DlzTTNS8NL853OMU6Q
 skU0pNov9OM5mxsGViPoaidLpMZX1k7Am8Ty3cmx1IUxMp8LyUUZ3SEZ5bcmfHPm1GehdFhwt
 jmk660aVpjDolw1/4zrVMvlGZCeCyMD35XDWzduw5Zv/wGXU9yd82dSv22mjozkhFFQBiGu5W
 HelxT/VGUQjnh42aZ27HIw8qjtjaDP0HARHcW5FEpmVq1EM1xKCJ18q9BLNHFnukPkp2pGPsE
 Q7SfZWvGe5doaPI7Qgn44/iFRzzanjU8cErG/XNiC15/0f4roBIybMTWrGrrDBsooJQ5pf3sr
 EIbaXpegrPdmc2FJ6luzXMNcRwiaBNmHzL8M6sAWe5aoMGwiTKYVRfHaZJwm7HS5UYgPLFJzQ
 +kz27V3pSxUXzL8Ck3cDWe5IgOISRUGwMbK/I6kUC/tVQf98bVrqdURzFZqDCM0trS4uqfERu
 ET7UgnUa2hRf8T2e2geiefVkonoDnEHM5gXcjZsn0PdmxY5yTvO5qAg2dYxH1XP5PbgDz4Cdn
 ZpSZxAoB4P6O3N0KBjn4F1MilOueV3jXNj9DzBGG3/gUKxN+z2KOwjf2bNRhQy/xCZZcsJWac
 bq4G9cOcY1V4GlUyeDdIWSaXesb7VJqsjUsgYuY+sF8Qv3GrOEjvRHZA+LK+DVGIDFwd5oAni
 hdumqOX
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> While I agree that the old code in arch/s390/kernel/debug.c does not abide to
> the current coding style standards, I doubt there is much value in these patches.

How do you value the recommended compliance with the current Linux coding style convention?

Will my contribution be useful for further considerations?


> To be honest I got annoyed after the third patch

Thanks for your response.


> and stopped reading after the forth.

Does anybody in your company care for further improvements also in this software module?

Are there still opportunities to continue development in more constructive ways here?

Regards,
Markus