On 7/18/23 17:53, hanyu001@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > This patch fixes the following checkpatch errors: The subject should be: ata: pata_sis: xxx But in any case, the above message says that this is a warning from checkpatch. But what are you patching to get this ? If you run checkpatch directly on drivers/ata/pata_sis.c, you will get *a lot* more warnings than just this. And I would not want patches to fix that, unless the warnings are also generated with "make W=1" or "make C=1". If you actually fix a bug in this driver that touches code around the lines you touch, then it is fine to fix that to avoid the warnings, but not just for the sake of it. libata code overall has a lot of code style issues that will trigger checkpatch warnings. When code is changed, fixing the code style at the same time is fine. Exception to this is again if you see warnings with "make W=1" or "make C=1". I applied a lot of patches recently to fix the code style in the pata_parport protocol modules because they were generating compilation warnings. > > ./drivers/ata/pata_sis.c:691: ERROR: space prohibited after that open > parenthesis '(' > ./drivers/ata/pata_sis.c:691: ERROR: space prohibited before that close > parenthesis ')' > > Signed-off-by: Yu Han < hanyu001@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/ata/pata_sis.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_sis.c b/drivers/ata/pata_sis.c > index 31de06b..2019777 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/pata_sis.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_sis.c > @@ -688,7 +688,7 @@ static void sis_fixup(struct pci_dev *pdev, struct > sis_chipset *sis) > > if (sis->info == &sis_info33) { > pci_read_config_byte(pdev, PCI_CLASS_PROG, ®); > - if (( reg & 0x0F ) != 0x00) > + if ((reg & 0x0F) != 0x00) > pci_write_config_byte(pdev, PCI_CLASS_PROG, reg & 0xF0); > /* Fall through to ATA16 fixup below */ > } -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research