Re: + locks-new-proc-lockinfo.patch added to -mm tree

[Alexey Dobriyan]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:06 AM,  <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +static void lockinfo_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl,

All caps sucks.

> + Â Â Â if (fl->fl_type & LOCK_MAND) {
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â seq_printf(f, "Access:\t\t %s\n",
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â(fl->fl_type & LOCK_READ)
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â? (fl->fl_type & LOCK_WRITE) ? "RW Â " : "READ "
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â: (fl->fl_type & LOCK_WRITE) ? "WRITE" : "NONE ");

I think using one of --, r-, -w, rw is nicer.
Trailing whitespace, why?

> + Â Â Â } else {
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â seq_printf(f, "Access:\t\t %s\n",
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â(lease_breaking(fl))
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â? (fl->fl_type & F_UNLCK) ? "UNLCK" : "READ "
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â: (fl->fl_type & F_WRLCK) ? "WRITE" : "READ ");

Trailing whitespace.

> + Â Â Â if (IS_POSIX(fl)) {
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â if (fl->fl_end == OFFSET_MAX)
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â seq_printf(f, "Start-end:\t %Ld-EOF\n\n", fl->fl_start);
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â else
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â seq_printf(f, "Start-end:\t %Ld-%Ld\n\n", fl->fl_start, fl->fl_end);
> + Â Â Â } else {
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â seq_printf(f, "Start-end:\t 0-EOF\n\n");

Separate start/end or range, if you want to keep it on one line.
¢éì®&Þ~º&¶¬–+-±éÝ¥Šw®žË±Êâmébžìdz¹Þ)í…æèw*jg¬±¨¶‰šŽŠÝj/êäz¹ÞŠà2ŠÞ¨è­Ú&¢)ß«a¶Úþø®G«éh®æj:+v‰¨Šwè†Ù>Wš±êÞiÛaxPjØm¶ŸÿÃ-»+ƒùdš_