On 07/12/2016 09:03 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Hello Shuah,
>
> On 07/11/2016 06:39 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> Fix misspelled error message and existing checkpatch errors in the
>> error message conditional.
>>
>> WARNING: suspect code indent for conditional statements (8, 24)
>> if (ctx->state != MFCINST_HEAD_PARSED &&
>> [...]
>> + mfc_err("Can not get crop information\n");
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>
> Patch looks good to me. Maybe is better to split the message and checkpatch
> changes in two different patches. But I don't have a strong opinion on this:
>
> Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
Thanks for the review. I considered splitting them, however the patch
that fixes the message will be flagged by checkpatch. It does make
sense to split the changes into two patches. What I could do is, make
the checkpatch fixes the first patch and fix the error message in the
second one.
How does that sound?
-- Shuah
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
