On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 19:05 +0530, Sricharan R wrote:
> On Thursday 12 June 2014 06:40 PM, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 05:23:16PM +0530, Sricharan R wrote:
> >> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-crossbar.c
> >> b/drivers/irqchip/irq-crossbar.c
[]
> >> @@ -34,7 +34,8 @@ struct crossbar_device {
> >> uint *irq_map;
> >> void __iomem *crossbar_base;
> >> int *register_offsets;
> >> - void (*write) (int, int);
> >> +
> >> + void (*write)(int, int);
> >
> > The empty line here looks bogus to me.
Good eye. It's unnecessary.
> Did you re-run checkpatch after
> > fixing the unnecessary space to see if it still complained about having
> > a 'blank line after declarations'?
> >
> Yes, it still complains even after fixing unnecessary space.
It's a checkpatch defect.
It's been fixed by:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/6/426
> > I'm generally opposed to these sorts of checkpatch patches, especially
> > when they are just warnings. It's great for a new driver in the staging
> > tree, but it makes backporting future bugfixes that much harder when
> > drivers have been live in mainline.
Blind adherence to checkpatch isn't always a great idea.
But bugfix backports haven't been much of an issue in
other subsystems with fairly active whitespace/style
changes.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
