On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 05:37:18AM +0000, Dorine Tipo wrote: > Add a blank line after the loopback_class struct declaration to silence > checkpatch warning Please use a blank line after Hi Dorine, I think you have a few patches posted where using a similar phrase '...to silence checkpatch warning'. The phrase is awkward because we never have a goal of silencing any warnings. We 'address' them. This checkpatch warning is reporting something that does not adhere to the kernel coding style. So, more fitting to say - "...to adhere to the kernel coding style." Adding 'Issue found using checkpatch' or the actual checkpatch warnging is commonly added. When you are addressing checkpatch warnings, you can bet you are not the first one to address it. So, you can search on previous commit messages and see what was well received, and if you search on Lore history, you can also see what was not well received. The Outreachy mailing list is a treasure trove of checkpatch commits. This, linked in the First Patch Tutorial, is helpful - https://kernelnewbies.org/PatchPhilosophy - Alison > function/struct/union/enum declarations. > > Signed-off-by: Dorine Tipo <dorine.a.tipo@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c > index bb33379b5297..4313d3bbc23a 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c > @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ struct gb_loopback { > static struct class loopback_class = { > .name = "gb_loopback", > }; > + > static DEFINE_IDA(loopback_ida); > > /* Min/max values in jiffies */ > -- > 2.25.1 > >
