On Tue, 2022-10-18 at 18:12 +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 11:21:26AM +0000, David Laight wrote: > > From: Greg KH > > > Sent: 17 October 2022 15:10 > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 06:52:50PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote: > > > > Reformat long running computation instructions to improve code readability. > > > > Address following checkpatch script complaints: > > > > CHECK: line length of 171 exceeds 100 columns > > > > CHECK: line length of 113 exceeds 100 columns [] > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_br_ext.c [] > > > > @@ -211,8 +211,10 @@ static int __nat25_network_hash(unsigned char *network_addr) > > > > } else if (network_addr[0] == NAT25_IPX) { > > > > unsigned long x; > > > > > > > > - x = network_addr[1] ^ network_addr[2] ^ network_addr[3] ^ network_addr[4] ^ > > > network_addr[5] ^ > > > > - network_addr[6] ^ network_addr[7] ^ network_addr[8] ^ network_addr[9] ^ > > > network_addr[10]; > > > > + x = network_addr[1] ^ network_addr[2] ^ network_addr[3] ^ > > > > > > Why not go out to [4] here and then you are one line shorter? > > > > and/or use a shorter variable name.... > Hi David, > I have already re-submitted the patch set with 4 in line arrangement. Do you > still suggest using shorter variable names? Assuming this code is not performance sensitive, I suggest not just molifying checkpatch but perhaps improving the code by adding a helper function something like: u8 xor_array_u8(u8 *x, size_t len) { size_t i; u8 xor = x[0]; for (i = 1; i < len; i++) xor ^= x[i]; return xor; } so for instance this could be: x = xor_array_u8(&network_addr[1], 10);