On 2/6/2014 9:11 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-06 at 20:15 -0800, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 1/15/2014 10:47 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> The first breaks a reset-controller include ordering requirement. It got
>>> an ack so I think we're ok for it to go through the clock tree.
>>>
>>
>> < snip >
>>
>> checkpatch is whining about patches
>>
>> 4
>> 5
>> 6
>> 7
>> 8
>>
>> (Just for completeness if someone thinks I did not check all the patches,
>> it also whines about patch 11, but I think the whining should be ignored,
>> and it whines about patch 1 but I think that might be a checkpatch bug.)
>
> Hi Frank.
>
> For patch 1, what checkpatch bug might that be?
see below
>
> I think all the checkpatch whinges in patch 11 are correct.
Agreed on patch 11, judgement call on whether to ignore the warnings.
>
> I didn't check any of 4-8.
Hi Joe,
Thanks for jumping in. I did not want to bother you until I dug a little
deeper into the warning to see if I was just misunderstanding something.
Sorry, it is patch 2, not patch 1 ("[PATCH v5 02/14] clk: Add
set_rate_and_parent() op"):
WARNING: Multiple spaces after return type
#188: FILE: include/linux/clk-provider.h:154:
+ int (*set_rate_and_parent)(struct clk_hw *hw,
total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 152 lines checked
-Frank
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
