On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 03:49:21 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-piix4.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-piix4.c
> > @@ -585,9 +585,28 @@ static s32 piix4_access_sb800(struct i2c_adapter *adap, u16 addr,
> > u8 command, int size, union i2c_smbus_data *data)
> > {
> > struct i2c_piix4_adapdata *adapdata = i2c_get_adapdata(adap);
> > + unsigned short piix4_smba = adapdata->smba;
> > u8 smba_en_lo;
> > u8 port;
> > int retval;
> > + int timeout = 0;
> > + int smbslvcnt;
>
> Keep them just after your another added variable.
FWIW, I don't think this makes sense as a general rule. I'd rather have
the variables in an order which makes sense (for human readers or for
stack size optimization - unless gcc does it for us?), rather than
always adding at the same place. Is there a rationale for doing that? I
don't think shrinking the patch size is good enough a reason.
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
