> -----Original Message----- > From: Abdul Rauf [mailto:abdulraufmujahid@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 6:24 PM > To: gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jkc@xxxxxxxxxx; *S-Par-Maintainer > <SParMaintainer@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [PATCH] staging: unisys: fix checkpatch block comments warning This patch has the same subject line as the previous patch? Which one should we use? Or can you make the names unique? David Kershner > > Fix the following warnings: > Block comments should align the * on each line > > Signed-off-by: Abdul Rauf <abdulraufmujahid@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorchipset.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorchipset.c > b/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorchipset.c > index 336af52d43d7..4e630ea527e8 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorchipset.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorchipset.c > @@ -1409,7 +1409,7 @@ parahotplug_process_message(struct > controlvm_message *inmsg) > * > * devices are automatically enabled at > * initialization. > - */ > + */ > parahotplug_request_kickoff(req); > controlvm_respond_physdev_changestate > (&inmsg->hdr, > -- > 2.11.0 _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
