On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 04:54:30PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 04:53:22PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 04:49:09PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 04:07:29PM -0400, David Kershner wrote: > > > > This patchset moves drivers/staging/unisys/include to > > > > include/linux/visorbus, and moves drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus to > > > > drivers/virt/visorbus. > > > > > > Um, are you thinking it is ready to be moved? Have you asked for > > > another review? > > > > > > In a totally random chance, I was doing some driver core work today and > > > I noticed that in drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c, you > > > have 2 tabs for your 'struct attribute' variables, which is really odd. > > > > > > Also, you should be using the ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS() macro for them instead > > > of having to "open code" the struct attribute_group lists. > > > > > > So either you all have horrible luck in that I just happened to find the > > > only remaining problem, or that you should proabably ask for a good code > > > audit, I haven't looked at the code before today since the last round of > > > "fun" I found in just one other random file :) > > > > Also, many of the attribute callbacks in that file seem to all have > > their leading '{' in the wrong place. Odd that checkpatch.pl doesn't > > catch that... > > > > partition_handle_show() is one such example that is obviously wrong. > > > > There's also one checkpatch.pl warning for it, which should probably be > > resolved as well. > > drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c:1035: WARNING: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'create_bus_instance', this function's name, in a string > > to be specific, something you should have caught, right? > > Are you sure this is ready to be moved out of staging? :( Eek, I can't look away... You do this a bunch: if (dev->visorchannel) { visorchannel_destroy(dev->visorchannel); yet the first thing that visorchannel_destroy() does is check for null. So, no need to test this twice, right, only do so in the function, that will make your code flow a lot "smoother" where ever you are calling this. Ok, I'll stop now, gotta go find some dinner... greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel