On Sun, 2017-05-21 at 12:54 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Ahern Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 10:17:47 -0600
> > On 5/21/17 10:05 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> >> But really, why bother?
> >>
> >> Just because checkpatch bleats some message doesn't
> >> mean it _has_ to be fixed.
> >>
> >> Please
From: David Ahern
Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 10:17:47 -0600
> On 5/21/17 10:05 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
>> But really, why bother?
>>
>> Just because checkpatch bleats some message doesn't
>> mean it _has_ to be fixed.
>>
>> Please strive to make the code more readable and
>> intelligible for _humans
On 5/21/17 10:05 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> But really, why bother?
>
> Just because checkpatch bleats some message doesn't
> mean it _has_ to be fixed.
>
> Please strive to make the code more readable and
> intelligible for _humans_. Compilers don't care.
+1
broad cleanups like this make 'git b
On Sun, 2017-05-21 at 08:55 +0800, yuan linyu wrote:
> From: yuan linyu
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/ndisc.c b/net/ipv6/ndisc.c
[]
> @@ -512,7 +519,8 @@ void ndisc_send_na(struct net_device *dev, const struct
> in6_addr *daddr,
> in6_ifa_put(ifp);
> } else {
> if (
