On Thu, 2018-10-25 at 09:05 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 05:05:53PM +0200, Aleksa Zdravkovic wrote:
> > This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning:
[]
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/axis-fifo/axis-fifo.c
> > b/drivers/staging/axis-fifo/axis-fifo.c
[]
> > @@ -482,10 +482,10 @@ static ssize_t axis_fifo_write(struct file *f, const
> > char __user *buf,
> > spin_lock_irq(&fifo->write_queue_lock);
> > ret = wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq_timeout
> > (fifo->write_queue,
> > - ioread32(fifo->base_addr + XLLF_TDFV_OFFSET)
> > + ioread32(fifo->base_addr + XLLF_TDFV_OFFSET)
> > >= words_to_write,
> > - fifo->write_queue_lock,
> > - (write_timeout >= 0) ? msecs_to_jiffies(write_timeout)
> > :
> > + fifo->write_queue_lock,
> > + (write_timeout >= 0) ? msecs_to_jiffies(write_timeout) :
> > MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
>
> The original was fine. Just leave it.
>
> Checkpatch.pl is only useful if it improves the readability for humans.
True, but I think the original is just OK.
Any suggestion on how to make the thing better?
wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq_timeout is a fairly long
identifier with multiple long arguments.
It's as if it should be written here as
ret =
wait_event_interruptible_lock_irq_timeout(fifo->write_queue,
ioread32(fifo->base_addr + XLLF_TDFV_OFFSET) >= words_to_write,
fifo->write_queue_lock,
write_timeout
>= 0 ? msecs_to_jiffies(write_timeout) : MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
where the longest is way over 80 chars, (140?) but I simply don't care
because it's just that much more readable for me.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
