On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Prashant P. Shah <pshah.mumbai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is a patch to the wl_profile.c file that fixes the C99 comments
> style issues found by the checkpatch.pl tool.
>
> Signed-off-by: Prashant P. Shah <pshah.mumbai@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_profile.c | 54 +++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_profile.c b/drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_profile.c
> index 13ade70..4a3b64d 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_profile.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/wlags49_h2/wl_profile.c
...
> @@ -118,17 +118,17 @@ int parse_yes_no(char *value);
>
> int parse_yes_no(char *value)
> {
> -int rc = 0; //default to NO for invalid parameters
> +int rc = 0; /* default to NO for invalid parameters */
>
> if (strlen(value) == 1) {
> if ((value[0] | ('Y'^'y')) == 'y')
> rc = 1;
> -// } else {
> -// this should not be debug time info, it is an enduser data entry error ;?
> -// DBG_WARNING(DbgInfo, "%s invalid; will be ignored\n", PARM_NAME_MICROWAVE_ROBUSTNESS);
> +/* } else {
> + this should not be debug time info, it is an enduser data entry error ;?
> + DBG_WARNING(DbgInfo, "%s invalid; will be ignored\n", PARM_NAME_MICROWAVE_ROBUSTNESS); */
In such case you have lost the internal comments. I think it should look like
/*
} else {
/* ... */
...
*/
> }
> return rc;
> -} // parse_yes_no
> +} /* parse_yes_no */
>
>
> /*******************************************************************************
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
