2016-01-05 12:27 GMT-03:00 Geyslan G. Bem <geyslan@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 2016-01-05 12:23 GMT-03:00 Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> On Tue, 2016-01-05 at 10:12 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2016, Geyslan G. Bem wrote:
>>>
>>> > >> @@ -404,12 +422,8 @@ static inline char token_mark(struct ehci_hcd *ehci, __hc32 token)
>>> > >> return '/';
>>> > >> }
>>> > >>
>>> > >> -static void qh_lines(
>>> > >> - struct ehci_hcd *ehci,
>>> > >> - struct ehci_qh *qh,
>>> > >> - char **nextp,
>>> > >> - unsigned *sizep
>>> > >> -)
>>> > >> +static void qh_lines(struct ehci_hcd *ehci, struct ehci_qh *qh,
>>> > >> + char **nextp, unsigned *sizep)
>>> > >> {
>>> > >> u32 scratch;
>>> > >> u32 hw_curr;
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> > And about that style? Should be done?
>>>
>>> You mean squeezing the function parameters into two lines? That's
>>> okay.
> Yes. I'll change this patch to do only that squeezing.
>
>>>
>>> However, the style in this file is to indent continuation lines by two
>>> extra tab stops, not to line things up with an open paren on the first
>>> line.
> I see. I used 3 tabs, reducing to 2.
>
>>
>> It's not consistent.
>> It's a bit of a mix of 1 and 2 tabs, and some others.
> I noticed it. Maybe to avoid the 80th column there are 1 tab indentations.
Others:
946
static struct debug_buffer *alloc_buffer(struct usb_bus *bus,
ssize_t (*fill_func)(struct debug_buffer *))
has 4 tabs on the second line.
986
static ssize_t debug_output(struct file *file, char __user *user_buf,
size_t len, loff_t *offset)
has 3 tabs and 4 spaces on the second line (aligned to open paren).
I think we should reduce them too to make the file consistent.
>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Geyslan G. Bem
> hackingbits.com
--
Regards,
Geyslan G. Bem
hackingbits.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
