On 09/18/2019 08:45 AM, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote: >>>>> cfi_udelay() open-codes DIV_ROUND_UP(), violating the kernel coding style >>>> >>>> Perhaps "violating" sounds a bit too harsh? >>> >>> Hm, indeed, scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain on this line. Do you have >>> other ideas how to call this? Or just omit this? >> > > scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict will complain about this. > >> Just "use the existing helper, instead of open-coding the same operation"? > > I agree with Geert. This driver file predates checkpatch and therefore > does not follow all kernel coding styles. But its good to replace > open-coding with available helper macro. > > Also, please don't post new patches in reply to an existing thread. This I don't think I did this. It wasn't intended anyway, sorry... > patch appears in-reply-to ("mtd: devices: m25p80: Use the spi-mem dirmap > API") which is unrelated to current patch. Indeed. MBR, Sergei ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/