On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 06:27:14PM +0530, Pavan Bobba wrote: > 1.conversion of formal argument names from camel case to snake case > for below functions: > > a.SROMvReadAllContents > b.SROMvReadEtherAddress > > 2.conversion of local variable names from camel case to snake case > in function SROMvReadEtherAddress > > 3.all instances of W_MAX_TIMEOUT replaced with MAX_TIMEOUT > > Issue found by checkpatch > > Signed-off-by: Pavan Bobba <opensource206@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/staging/vt6655/baseband.c | 12 ++++---- > drivers/staging/vt6655/card.c | 4 +-- > drivers/staging/vt6655/mac.c | 46 ++++++++++++++--------------- > drivers/staging/vt6655/mac.h | 2 +- > drivers/staging/vt6655/rf.c | 6 ++-- > drivers/staging/vt6655/srom.c | 48 +++++++++++++++---------------- > 6 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-) > Hi, This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux kernel tree. You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s) as indicated below: - Your patch did many different things all at once, making it difficult to review. All Linux kernel patches need to only do one thing at a time. If you need to do multiple things (such as clean up all coding style issues in a file/driver), do it in a sequence of patches, each one doing only one thing. This will make it easier to review the patches to ensure that they are correct, and to help alleviate any merge issues that larger patches can cause. - You did not specify a description of why the patch is needed, or possibly, any description at all, in the email body. Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file, Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what is needed in order to properly describe the change. - You did not write a descriptive Subject: for the patch, allowing Greg, and everyone else, to know what this patch is all about. Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file, Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what a proper Subject: line should look like. If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received from other developers. thanks, greg k-h's patch email bot
