On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 09:25:24AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 01:57:38 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > Hi Farid, > > > > thanks for this approach. Have you checked that the binary is the same > > before/after your patch? If so, please mention in your patch description. > > > > Also, always keep in mind that checkpatch helps to make code readable. Some of > > your changes should keep readability in mind not just fixing the warnings. > > > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 09:11:37PM +0200, Farid Hammane wrote: > > > This patch fixes all coding style issues found by checkpatch.pl. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Farid Hammane <farid.hammane@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/i2c/algos/i2c-algo-pca.c | 74 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > > > 1 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/algos/i2c-algo-pca.c b/drivers/i2c/algos/i2c-algo-pca.c > > > (...) > > > @@ -178,12 +178,12 @@ static int pca_rx_ack(struct i2c_algo_pca_data *adap, > > > } > > > > > > static int pca_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *i2c_adap, > > > - struct i2c_msg *msgs, > > > - int num) > > > + struct i2c_msg *msgs, > > > + int num) > > > > One more tab maybe? > > Better use tab + spaces and align on the opening parenthesis. What > checkpatch.pl complains about here isn't the alignment, it's the use of > more than 8 consecutive spaces. > OK > > > (...) > > > @@ -241,8 +244,10 @@ static int pca_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *i2c_adap, > > > completed = pca_address(adap, msg); > > > break; > > > > > > - case 0x18: /* SLA+W has been transmitted; ACK has been received */ > > > - case 0x28: /* Data byte in I2CDAT has been transmitted; ACK has been received */ > > > + case 0x18: /* SLA+W has been transmitted; > > > + ACK has been received */ > > > + case 0x28: /* Data byte in I2CDAT has been transmitted; > > > + ACK has been received */ > > > > First, check CodingStyle for how multiline comments should look like. For > > readability, I'd like to keep them single line, though. I think this could > > be done by rewording. Same for all following comments. > > Please keep in mind that Farid doesn't know the code. He is "only" > helping with formatting cleanups. Asking him to reword the comments I think s/has been//g will help already. And getting accoustomed to the code you are modifying is not that bad ;) > doesn't seem wise. And there's nothing wrong with two-line comments as > above. The "preferred comment format" in CodingStyle is often > unrealistic IMHO, I'm not always following it in my own code. I disagree here. I'd rather break the 80 columns limit than having multiline comments not really standing out. Also, I feel a bit uneasy as changing the comments spoils the history for git-blame in case you want to know when/if the state-machine was changed. Then again, I like properly formatted code. Summa summarum, just send V2, it's not really worth fighting over it :) Regards, Wolfram -- Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
