Hello Shuah,
On 07/12/2016 11:07 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> 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?
>
Sounds good to me.
> -- Shuah
>
>
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
--
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
