From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sched: One function call less in em_meta_change()
 after error detection
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 23:51:25 +0100
Message-ID: <54CD5C6D.2040704@gmx.de>
References: <5307CAA2.8060406@users.sourceforge.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402212321410.2043@localhost6.localdomain6> <530A086E.8010901@users.sourceforge.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402231635510.1985@localhost6.localdomain6> <530A72AA.3000601@users.sourceforge.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402240658210.2090@localhost6.localdomain6> <530B5FB6.6010207@users.sourceforge.net> <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402241710370.2074@hadrien> <530C5E18.1020800@users.sourceforge.net> <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402251014170.2080@hadrien> <530CD2C4.4050903@users.sourceforge.net> <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402251840450.7035@hadrien> <530CF8FF.8080600@users.sourceforge.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402252117150.2047@localhost6.localdomain6> <530DD06F.4090703@users.sourceforge.net> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402262129250.2221@localhost6.localdomain6> <5317A59D.4@users.so
 urceforge.net> <54CD042E.6030606@users.sourceforge.net> <54CD115C.8070801@gmx.de> <54CD4D91.9080801@users.sourceforge.net> <54CD5404.1010004@gmx.de> <54CD5529.5060209@users.sourceforge.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <54CD5529.5060209@users.sourceforge.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On 31.01.2015 23:20, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>>> I find that all these cases correspond to the current Linux coding
>>> style documentation, doesn't it?
>> 
>> Sure, I think it does.
> 
> Thanks for your acknowledgement.
> 
> 
>> But it was not coding style violation what I was reffering to.
> 
> Do you suggest any fine-tuning for the affected documentation
> so that I would tweak my update suggestion once more?
> 

No I dont think that any documentation has to be adjusted. If you agree
with me you should adjust the patch accordingly and resend it. Otherwise
keep it as it is.

Regards,
Lino