Thank you, Dan. > It feels like the ->dma_desc buffer is supposed to go to be used > by the hardware but I don't see where that happens. This driver > looks like complete garbage. We should re-write it completely. > It's better to leave the static checker warnings there to mark that > the driver needs to be re-written instead of silencing the warnings > but not fixing the code. Fixing the code proably means re-writing > it to be CPU endian. Ok -- I'll ditch this patch. >> * Removes some spaces to elimite "checkpatch" warnings. > > I don't see any checkpatch warnings. I assume you are talking about > the indent changes here. > > The indenting was correct in the original and the patch is wrong. So that I know for the future: if I remove the indentation changes 'checkpatch' returns these warnings. Should I ignore these in the future? WARNING: line over 80 characters #15: FILE: drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/gsc_hpdi.c:444: + (unsigned long)le32_to_cpu(devpriv->dma_desc[i].next)); WARNING: line over 80 characters #33: FILE: drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/gsc_hpdi.c:798: + le32_to_cpu(devpriv->dma_desc[devpriv->dma_desc_index]. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
