On 11.02.21 19:20, Adithya Chandrakasan wrote:
On 2/11/21 2:36 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
^
Please create proper patch subjects. Nobody has a glue what you are doing when looking at the subject.
"mm/util: fix ??? warning"
Which raises the question, what is ???
Compiler? static code checker? ... ?
Thanks
On 11.02.21 08:29, Adithya Chandrakasan wrote:
FILE: mm/util.c:930: WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
Signed-off-by: Adithya Chandrakasan <adithya.chandrakasan@xxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/util.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/mm/util.c b/mm/util.c
index 8c9b7d1e7c49..60286876636d 100644
--- a/mm/util.c
+++ b/mm/util.c
@@ -927,6 +927,7 @@ int get_cmdline(struct task_struct *task, char *buffer, int buflen)
unsigned int len;
struct mm_struct *mm = get_task_mm(task);
unsigned long arg_start, arg_end, env_start, env_end;
+
if (!mm)
goto out;
if (!mm->arg_end)
Hi David,
Thanks for feedback. I have fixed the issues in the patch thread with
change in subject and also log message.
Hi,
Please always send patches via proper mails and versioned.
E.g.,
rm *.patch
git format-patch -1 -v2
git send-email --to ... *.patch
The introducing patch is from 2014. So I wonder how you even get a
checkpatch warning?
a90902531a06a ("proc read mm's {arg,env}_{start,end} with mmap semaphore
taken.")
Anyhow, maybe just call this patch "mm: util.c: minor coding style fix",
that makes it clearer that this is really minor and has been in the code
for a while.
Thanks!
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
