On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 12:59 PM Milan Lakhani <[email protected]> wrote: > > Correct line length and alignment in rxtx.c. Reported by checkpatch. > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> > Cc: Forest Bond <[email protected]> > CC: [email protected] > CC: [email protected]
Milan, I am wondering where you picked up this convention to add these Cc: and CC: tags in your patch? Is there some documentation that points out to do that? (That might need to be fixed...) Did you observe that on some other commits? I think these tags are added by some maintainers (probably tool-supported) when they pick the patches, not by the authors, though. > Signed-off-by: Milan Lakhani <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c | 63 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c > index 508e1bd..4073c33 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c > @@ -492,14 +492,29 @@ s_uFillDataHead( > pDevice->byTopCCKBasicRate, > PK_TYPE_11B, &buf->b); > /* Get Duration and TimeStamp */ > - buf->duration_a = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A, cbFrameLength, > byPktType, > - > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, uFragIdx, cbLastFragmentSize, uMACfragNum, > byFBOption)); > - buf->duration_b = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_B, cbFrameLength, > PK_TYPE_11B, > - > pDevice->byTopCCKBasicRate, bNeedAck, uFragIdx, cbLastFragmentSize, > uMACfragNum, byFBOption)); > - buf->duration_a_f0 = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A_F0, cbFrameLength, > byPktType, > - > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, uFragIdx, cbLastFragmentSize, uMACfragNum, > byFBOption)); > - buf->duration_a_f1 = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A_F1, cbFrameLength, > byPktType, > - > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, uFragIdx, cbLastFragmentSize, uMACfragNum, > byFBOption)); > + buf->duration_a = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A, > + > cbFrameLength, byPktType, > + > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, > + > uFragIdx, cbLastFragmentSize, > + > uMACfragNum, byFBOption)); > + buf->duration_b = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_B, > + > cbFrameLength, PK_TYPE_11B, > + > pDevice->byTopCCKBasicRate, > + > bNeedAck, uFragIdx, > + > cbLastFragmentSize, > + > uMACfragNum, byFBOption)); > + buf->duration_a_f0 = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A_F0, > + > cbFrameLength, byPktType, > + > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, > + > uFragIdx, > + > cbLastFragmentSize, > + > uMACfragNum, byFBOption)); > + buf->duration_a_f1 = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A_F1, > + > cbFrameLength, byPktType, > + > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, > + > uFragIdx, > + > cbLastFragmentSize, > + > uMACfragNum, byFBOption)); > Now to this change... it seems reasonable to refactor this into a dedicated function or macro because this is largely "copy-and-paste" calls with slight variable on a single argument. How about proposing such a change instead? > buf->time_stamp_off_a = vnt_time_stamp_off(pDevice, > wCurrentRate); > buf->time_stamp_off_b = vnt_time_stamp_off(pDevice, > pDevice->byTopCCKBasicRate); > @@ -517,12 +532,32 @@ s_uFillDataHead( > byPktType, &buf->a); > > /* Get Duration and TimeStampOff */ > - buf->duration = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A, cbFrameLength, > byPktType, > - > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, uFragIdx, cbLastFragmentSize, uMACfragNum, > byFBOption)); > - buf->duration_f0 = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A_F0, cbFrameLength, > byPktType, > - > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, uFragIdx, cbLastFragmentSize, uMACfragNum, > byFBOption)); > - buf->duration_f1 = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A_F1, cbFrameLength, > byPktType, > - > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, uFragIdx, cbLastFragmentSize, uMACfragNum, > byFBOption)); > + buf->duration = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A, > + > cbFrameLength, > + > byPktType, > + > wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, > + > uFragIdx, > + > cbLastFragmentSize, > + > uMACfragNum, > + > byFBOption)); > + buf->duration_f0 = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, > + > DATADUR_A_F0, > + > cbFrameLength, > + > byPktType, > + > wCurrentRate, > + > bNeedAck, uFragIdx, > + > cbLastFragmentSize, > + > uMACfragNum, > + > byFBOption)); > + buf->duration_f1 = > cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, > + > DATADUR_A_F1, > + > cbFrameLength, > + > byPktType, > + > wCurrentRate, > + > bNeedAck, uFragIdx, > + > cbLastFragmentSize, > + > uMACfragNum, > + > byFBOption)); > buf->time_stamp_off = vnt_time_stamp_off(pDevice, > wCurrentRate); > return buf->duration; > } > -- > 2.7.4 > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#187): https://lists.elisa.tech/g/linux-safety/message/187 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.elisa.tech/mt/78451464/1714638 > Group Owner: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.elisa.tech/g/linux-safety/unsub > [[email protected]] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > >
