Hi Mika,
Thanks for the review again!
Mika Westerberg wrote:
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 01:03:50PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
+static int acpi_fwnode_property_read_int_array(
This is really ugly way to split arguments into multiple lines IMHO.
+ struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, const char *propname,
+ unsigned int elem_size, void *val, size_t nval)
I would much more see something like:
static int
acpi_fwnode_property_read_int_array(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
const char *propname, unsigned int elem_size, void *val, size_t nval)
or even
static int
acpi_fwnode_property_read_int_array(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
const char *propname,
unsigned int elem_size,
void *val, size_t nval)
ditto for all occurences.
Other than that this patch looks reasonable to me.
I don't think CodingStyle defines any particular points where to wrap
the lines. Different conventions seem to exist:
$ git grep '^\(static\|const\|inline\|int\|struct\|u\[0-9\).*($' |wc -l
3106
Not all of the occurrences found exhibit such indentation but then again
the above does not catch all of those that do either.
I can change that if you insist but I'm telling you that it wouldn't be
alone in the kernel. :-)
--
Kind regards,
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
