On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 21:29 +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:41:09AM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > > This patch fixes line over 80 characters warninings while > > running checkpatch.pl > > You should know 80 char is a warn not an error, and you should read the > Codingstyle documentation before you embark on these changes. > The guiding principle here is readablity and greapblity, anything which > breaks these is strict NO. Well, those abilities are at a minimum certainly goalposts and should be preferred over most everything else. > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/omap-dma.c b/drivers/dma/omap-dma.c [] > > @@ -168,7 +168,8 @@ static inline struct omap_chan *to_omap_dma_chan(struct dma_chan *c) > > return container_of(c, struct omap_chan, vc.chan); > > } > > > > -static inline struct omap_desc *to_omap_dma_desc(struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *t) > > +static inline struct omap_desc *to_omap_dma_desc( > > + struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *t) > This makes it harder to read, if you see drivers the will do it: > > static inline struct omap_desc > *to_omap_dma_desc(struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *t) That's a relatively unusual style. The more common style is to keep the pointer on the same line as the return type like: static inline struct omap_desc * to_omap_dma_desc(struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *t) It's roughly 50:1 for the * on the 1st line. > > @@ -334,7 +336,7 @@ static void omap_dma_stop(struct omap_chan *c) > > if (val & (CCR_RD_ACTIVE | CCR_WR_ACTIVE)) > > dev_err(c->vc.chan.device->dev, > > "DMA drain did not complete on lch %d\n", > > - c->dma_ch); > > + c->dma_ch); > whats changes here? title says 80 char! spacing, there's an 8 char space where there could be a tab. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
