On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 02:20:06PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 02:13:16PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 12:44:36PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 05:27:33PM +0800, Bingbu Cao wrote: > > > > On 8/15/20 12:30 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > We may use special helper macro to poll IO till condition or timeout occurs. > > > > > > > > + ret = readl_poll_timeout(dma, value, value & CIO2_CDMAC0_DMA_HALTED, 4000, 2000000); > > > > > > > > This line is too long, need a break, others look good for me. > > > > > > checkpatch doesn't complain, but if you insist, I'll split it in v2. > > > > The coding style hasn't changed, it's just the checkpatch.pl warning that > > has. > > Joe, it seems we have inconsistency now between checkpatch and coding style. > Shouldn't we revert 100 limit warning to 80? There are sometimes genuine reasons for having longer lines than 80, and depending on the code, that happens more often in some places than elsewhere. This tended to generate lots of checkpatch.pl warnings in the past. While I didn't see the patch removing the 80 chars per line limit until it made the news, I think it was a quite reasonable compromise. -- Sakari Ailus
