Hi Andrei,
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010, Andrei Emeltchenko wrote:
> > - if (haddr->hci_dev != HCI_DEV_NONE) {
> > - if (!(hdev = hci_dev_get(haddr->hci_dev))) {
> > + if (haddr.hci_dev != HCI_DEV_NONE) {
> > + if (!(hdev = hci_dev_get(haddr.hci_dev))) {
>
> doesn't checkpatch give errors here?
Probably, but I've understood that it's ok if it's the existing code
that contains the coding style issue.
> Would be more clean like:
> ...
> hdev = hci_dev_get(haddr.hci_dev);
> if (!hdev)
> ...
>
> At some point shall be fixed in the old code also
Agreed. A separate code cleanup patch would be nice. I've intentionally
kept the old style to not mix coding style and functional changes into
the same patch and to make it clear that I'm not introducing any changes
to the code logic at this place.
Johan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
