From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4A1C3A59F for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 02:06:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B04FB21897 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 02:06:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727888AbfH3CG5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Aug 2019 22:06:57 -0400 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:5696 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727270AbfH3CGz (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Aug 2019 22:06:55 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 0EC28CB0385988FD9438; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:06:42 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:06:31 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: exfat: add exfat filesystem code to staging To: Dan Carpenter , Gao Xiang CC: , Sasha Levin , =?UTF-8?Q?Valdis_Kl=c4=93tnieks?= , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , , Christoph Hellwig , , "OGAWA Hirofumi" References: <20190828160817.6250-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> <20190828170022.GA7873@kroah.com> <20190829062340.GB3047@infradead.org> <20190829063955.GA30193@kroah.com> <20190829094136.GA28643@infradead.org> <20190829095019.GA13557@kroah.com> <20190829103749.GA13661@infradead.org> <20190829111810.GA23393@kroah.com> <20190829151144.GJ23584@kadam> <20190829152757.GA125003@architecture4> <20190829154346.GK23584@kadam> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:06:25 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190829154346.GK23584@kadam> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/8/29 23:43, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> p.s. There are 2947 (un)likely places in fs/ directory. > > I was complaining about you adding new pointless ones, not existing > ones. The likely/unlikely annotations are supposed to be functional and > not decorative. I explained this very clearly. > > Probably most of the annotations in fs/ are wrong but they are also > harmless except for the slight messiness. However there are definitely > some which are important so removing them all isn't a good idea. Hi Dan, Could you please pick up one positive example using likely and unlikely correctly? so we can follow the example, rather than removing them all blindly. Thanks, > >> If you like, I will delete them all. > > But for erofs, I don't think that any of the likely/unlikely calls have > been thought about so I'm fine with removing all of them in one go. > > regards, > dan carpenter > > . >