On 14-9-9 上午7:15, "Greg KH" <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 05:32:52PM +0800, Barry Song wrote:
>> From: Qipan Li <Qipan.Li@xxxxxxx>
>>
>> According to key customer's requirement, fix "line over 80
>> characters".
>
>Someone is forcing you to fix all upstream kernel.org code for 80
>columns? Who?
we were asked to fix csr platform codes some days ago. They have been
fixed locally.
You know, the difficulty is maintaining the difference between mainline
and local codes.
So I thought this is better if you can merge it.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Qipan Li <Qipan.Li@xxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Barry Song <Baohua.Song@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/tty/serial/sirfsoc_uart.c | 14 +++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/sirfsoc_uart.c
>>b/drivers/tty/serial/sirfsoc_uart.c
>> index 4102192..89f1e59 100644
>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/sirfsoc_uart.c
>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/sirfsoc_uart.c
>> @@ -525,7 +525,8 @@ static void sirfsoc_rx_tmo_process_tl(unsigned long
>>param)
>>
>> spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
>> while (DMA_COMPLETE == dmaengine_tx_status(sirfport->rx_dma_chan,
>> - sirfport->rx_dma_items[sirfport->rx_completed].cookie, &tx_state)) {
>> + sirfport->rx_dma_items[sirfport->rx_completed].cookie,
>> + &tx_state)) {
>
>Isn't that now harder to read?
>
>> sirfsoc_uart_insert_rx_buf_to_tty(sirfport,
>> SIRFSOC_RX_DMA_BUF_SIZE);
>> sirfport->rx_completed++;
>> @@ -707,7 +708,8 @@ static void
>>sirfsoc_uart_rx_dma_complete_tl(unsigned long param)
>> struct dma_tx_state tx_state;
>> spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
>> while (DMA_COMPLETE == dmaengine_tx_status(sirfport->rx_dma_chan,
>> - sirfport->rx_dma_items[sirfport->rx_completed].cookie, &tx_state)) {
>> + sirfport->rx_dma_items[sirfport->rx_completed].cookie,
>> + &tx_state)) {
>
>Same here.
>
>> sirfsoc_uart_insert_rx_buf_to_tty(sirfport,
>> SIRFSOC_RX_DMA_BUF_SIZE);
>> if (rd_regl(port, ureg->sirfsoc_int_en_reg) &
>> @@ -1303,7 +1305,8 @@ static int sirfsoc_uart_probe(struct
>>platform_device *pdev)
>> "sirf,uart-has-rtscts");
>> if (of_device_is_compatible(pdev->dev.of_node, "sirf,prima2-uart"))
>> sirfport->uart_reg->uart_type = SIRF_REAL_UART;
>> - if (of_device_is_compatible(pdev->dev.of_node,
>>"sirf,prima2-usp-uart")) {
>> + if (of_device_is_compatible(pdev->dev.of_node,
>> + "sirf,prima2-usp-uart")) {
>
>Same.
>
>> sirfport->uart_reg->uart_type = SIRF_USP_UART;
>> if (!sirfport->hw_flow_ctrl)
>> goto usp_no_flow_control;
>> @@ -1360,11 +1363,12 @@ usp_no_flow_control:
>> goto err;
>> }
>> tasklet_init(&sirfport->rx_dma_complete_tasklet,
>> - sirfsoc_uart_rx_dma_complete_tl, (unsigned long)sirfport);
>> + sirfsoc_uart_rx_dma_complete_tl, (unsigned long)sirfport);
>
>Same.
>
>You can break this line at the last variable instead.
>
>> tasklet_init(&sirfport->rx_tmo_process_tasklet,
>> sirfsoc_rx_tmo_process_tl, (unsigned long)sirfport);
>> port->mapbase = res->start;
>> - port->membase = devm_ioremap(&pdev->dev, res->start,
>>resource_size(res));
>> + port->membase = devm_ioremap(&pdev->dev,
>> + res->start, resource_size(res));
>
>same here, it could be made to look better.
>
>Sorry, not going to take this, if your customer blames you, point them
>at me.
I understand you are very helpful. But pointing them to you will actually
make things worse as I think we have no chance to convince them as we have
tried our best to do that.
The benefit of this patch is making people happy. But if you are not
happy, I can make myself unhappy to maintain two versions.
>
>seriously.
>
>greg k-h
>
-barry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
