On Thu, 2018-10-25 at 09:05 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 05:05:53PM +0200, Aleksa Zdravkovic wrote: > > This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning: [] > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/axis-fifo/axis-fifo.c b/drivers/staging/axis-fifo/axis-fifo.c [] > > @@ -482,10 +482,10 @@ static ssize_t axis_fifo_write(struct file *f, const char __user *buf, > > spin_lock_irq(&fifo->write_queue_lock); > > ret = wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq_timeout > > (fifo->write_queue, > > - ioread32(fifo->base_addr + XLLF_TDFV_OFFSET) > > + ioread32(fifo->base_addr + XLLF_TDFV_OFFSET) > > >= words_to_write, > > - fifo->write_queue_lock, > > - (write_timeout >= 0) ? msecs_to_jiffies(write_timeout) : > > + fifo->write_queue_lock, > > + (write_timeout >= 0) ? msecs_to_jiffies(write_timeout) : > > MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT); > > The original was fine. Just leave it. > > Checkpatch.pl is only useful if it improves the readability for humans. True, but I think the original is just OK. Any suggestion on how to make the thing better? wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq_timeout is a fairly long identifier with multiple long arguments. It's as if it should be written here as ret = wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq_timeout(fifo->write_queue, ioread32(fifo->base_addr + XLLF_TDFV_OFFSET) >= words_to_write, fifo->write_queue_lock, write_timeout >= 0 ? msecs_to_jiffies(write_timeout) : MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT); where the longest is way over 80 chars, (140?) but I simply don't care because it's just that much more readable for me. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
