Re: [PATCH v4 01/16] drm: exynos/dp: fix code style

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Hi Joe,

在 09/03/2015 01:57 PM, Joe Perches 写道:
On Thu, 2015-09-03 at 13:33 +0800, Yakir Yang wrote:
[]
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c
[]
@@ -155,24 +156,22 @@ static int exynos_dp_read_edid(struct
exynos_dp_device *dp)
            }
              exynos_dp_read_byte_from_dpcd(dp, DP_TEST_REQUEST,
-                    &test_vector);
+                          &test_vector);
            if (test_vector & DP_TEST_LINK_EDID_READ) {
-            exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp,
-                DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM,
+            exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(
+                dp, DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM,
                    edid[EDID_BLOCK_LENGTH + EDID_CHECKSUM]);
-            exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp,
-                DP_TEST_RESPONSE,
+            exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(
+                dp, DP_TEST_RESPONSE,
                    DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM_WRITE);
To me, missing argument after opening parenthesis, looks worse. I would
prefer:

              exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp,

Why you moved the 'dp' argument to new line?
Hmm... Just like style tool indicate, no more warning after
that change.

For now, I would like to follow the original style, just improved
some obvious style problem.  :-)
What was the checkpatch warning that said 'dp' has to move to new line?
I tried this and I don't see it.
checkpatch haven't remind me that put dp to new line would fix
this warning, this just come from my experiments. And I works,
no more warnings from checkpatch, so I toke this style.
Checkpatch isn't a great arbiter of style.
It's just a brainless tool.

Always use your instead of anything brainless.

If it were code I was writing, I'd ignore 80 columns warnings
where appropriate.

These are long function names and long macro defines, so it's
inappropriate to use 80 columns as a guiding style.

I'd write:

		exynos_dp_read_byte_from_dpcd(dp, DP_TEST_REQUEST, &test_vector);
		if (test_vector & DP_TEST_LINK_EDID_READ) {
			exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp, DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM,
						     edid[EDID_BLOCK_LENGTH + EDID_CHECKSUM]);
			exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp, DP_TEST_RESPONSE,
						     DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM_WRITE);
		}


So... just ignore the 80 columns warnings. Actually I prefer to
keep the original style in this case.

Thanks,
- Yakir
]





--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux