Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
DaeSeok Youn writes: >>> - * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this >>> is first >>> - * found >>> + * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is >>> + * fisrt found >>^ >> I wonder what's your exact procedure for doing such changes :-) > "first" word is over 80 line character after applying my previous patch(2/5) > (previous patch is already merged to staging-next tree :-)) Sure, I meant I'd just break the line without re-typing the first/fisrt word manually... Never mind. Anyway, I'd rather aim for improving overall code quality, not just silence 80-char warning. I'm not a big fan of this warning. -- Krzysztof Halasa Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warsaw, Poland -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
Hi, Joe and Krzysztof I think that code which can be improved to hex_dump() may be used for debugging. So that improvement will be sent with another patch. I think it would be fine. right? Thanks. Daeseok Youn. 2014-03-03 16:33 GMT+09:00 DaeSeok Youn : > I think line break is a solution about long line warning. And > replacing with hex_dump() is better than managing with another patch. > So I said this improvement is separated with another patch. > > Just my opinion. > If I'm wrong, I try to change as Krzysztof's comment in same patch. > > Thanks. > Daeseok Youn. > > 2014-03-03 16:10 GMT+09:00 Joe Perches : >> On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 16:01 +0900, DaeSeok Youn wrote: >>> 2014-03-03 15:46 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Hałasa : >>> > why not use some existing *hex_dump*() instead? >>> OK. but this patch is only for fix line length over 80 characters, >>> right? If it can be improved as your comment, >>> it must be in another patch. >> >> Not true. Always strive to improve the code in >> preference to shutting up checkpatch warnings. >> >> -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
Hi, Joe and Krzysztof I think that code which can be improved to hex_dump() may be used for debugging. So that improvement will be sent with another patch. I think it would be fine. right? Thanks. Daeseok Youn. 2014-03-03 16:33 GMT+09:00 DaeSeok Youn daeseok.y...@gmail.com: I think line break is a solution about long line warning. And replacing with hex_dump() is better than managing with another patch. So I said this improvement is separated with another patch. Just my opinion. If I'm wrong, I try to change as Krzysztof's comment in same patch. Thanks. Daeseok Youn. 2014-03-03 16:10 GMT+09:00 Joe Perches j...@perches.com: On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 16:01 +0900, DaeSeok Youn wrote: 2014-03-03 15:46 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Hałasa khal...@piap.pl: why not use some existing *hex_dump*() instead? OK. but this patch is only for fix line length over 80 characters, right? If it can be improved as your comment, it must be in another patch. Not true. Always strive to improve the code in preference to shutting up checkpatch warnings. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
DaeSeok Youn daeseok.y...@gmail.com writes: - * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is first - * found + * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is + * fisrt found ^ I wonder what's your exact procedure for doing such changes :-) first word is over 80 line character after applying my previous patch(2/5) (previous patch is already merged to staging-next tree :-)) Sure, I meant I'd just break the line without re-typing the first/fisrt word manually... Never mind. Anyway, I'd rather aim for improving overall code quality, not just silence 80-char warning. I'm not a big fan of this warning. -- Krzysztof Halasa Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warsaw, Poland -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
I think line break is a solution about long line warning. And replacing with hex_dump() is better than managing with another patch. So I said this improvement is separated with another patch. Just my opinion. If I'm wrong, I try to change as Krzysztof's comment in same patch. Thanks. Daeseok Youn. 2014-03-03 16:10 GMT+09:00 Joe Perches : > On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 16:01 +0900, DaeSeok Youn wrote: >> 2014-03-03 15:46 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Hałasa : >> > why not use some existing *hex_dump*() instead? >> OK. but this patch is only for fix line length over 80 characters, >> right? If it can be improved as your comment, >> it must be in another patch. > > Not true. Always strive to improve the code in > preference to shutting up checkpatch warnings. > > -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 16:01 +0900, DaeSeok Youn wrote: > 2014-03-03 15:46 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Hałasa : > > why not use some existing *hex_dump*() instead? > OK. but this patch is only for fix line length over 80 characters, > right? If it can be improved as your comment, > it must be in another patch. Not true. Always strive to improve the code in preference to shutting up checkpatch warnings. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
2014-03-03 15:46 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Hałasa :
> Daeseok Youn writes:
>
>> clean up checkpatch.pl warnings:
>> WARNING: Line length over 80 characters
>
> This warning should be long gone IMHO. It does more harm than good.
>
>> unsigned char *ucp = (unsigned char *) >mfg_info.data;
>>
>> pr_info("eeprom[00]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
>> %02x\n",
>> - *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp +
>> 3), *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7));
>> + *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3),
>> + *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7));
>> pr_info("eeprom[08]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
>> %02x\n",
>> - *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp +
>> 11), *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15));
>> + *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp + 11),
>> + *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15));
>> pr_info("eeprom[16]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
>> %02x\n",
>> - *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp +
>> 19), *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23));
>> + *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp + 19),
>> + *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23));
>> pr_info("eeprom[24]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
>> %02x\n",
>> - *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp +
>> 27), *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31));
>> + *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp + 27),
>> + *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31));
>> pr_info("eeprom[32]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
>> %02x\n",
>> - *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp +
>> 35), *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39));
>> + *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp + 35),
>> + *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39));
>> pr_info("eeprom[40]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
>> %02x\n",
>> - *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp +
>> 43), *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47));
>> + *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp + 43),
>> + *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47));
>> }
>
> This one is probably an improvement, though... why not use some existing
> *hex_dump*() instead?
OK. but this patch is only for fix line length over 80 characters,
right? If it can be improved as your comment,
it must be in another patch.
>
>> - * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is
>> first
>> - * found
>> + * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is
>> + * fisrt found
>^
> I wonder what's your exact procedure for doing such changes :-)
"first" word is over 80 line character after applying my previous patch(2/5)
(previous patch is already merged to staging-next tree :-))
>
>> #ifdef SBE_MAP_DEBUG
>> pr_warning("%s: io remapped from phys %x to virt %x\n",
>> -hi->devname, (u_int32_t) hi->addr[j],
>> (u_int32_t) hi->addr_mapped[j]);
>> +hi->devname, (u_int32_t) hi->addr[j],
>> +(u_int32_t) hi->addr_mapped[j]);
>
> This one is fine, too. The others, I wouldn't touch them.
this line, same reason above one.
> --
> Krzysztof Halasa
>
> Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP
> Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warsaw, Poland
--
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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
Daeseok Youn writes:
> clean up checkpatch.pl warnings:
> WARNING: Line length over 80 characters
This warning should be long gone IMHO. It does more harm than good.
> unsigned char *ucp = (unsigned char *) >mfg_info.data;
>
> pr_info("eeprom[00]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
> %02x\n",
> - *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3),
> *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7));
> + *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3),
> + *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7));
> pr_info("eeprom[08]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
> %02x\n",
> - *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp +
> 11), *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15));
> + *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp + 11),
> + *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15));
> pr_info("eeprom[16]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
> %02x\n",
> - *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp +
> 19), *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23));
> + *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp + 19),
> + *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23));
> pr_info("eeprom[24]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
> %02x\n",
> - *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp +
> 27), *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31));
> + *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp + 27),
> + *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31));
> pr_info("eeprom[32]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
> %02x\n",
> - *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp +
> 35), *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39));
> + *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp + 35),
> + *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39));
> pr_info("eeprom[40]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
> %02x\n",
> - *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp +
> 43), *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47));
> + *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp + 43),
> + *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47));
> }
This one is probably an improvement, though... why not use some existing
*hex_dump*() instead?
> - * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is
> first
> - * found
> + * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is
> + * fisrt found
^
I wonder what's your exact procedure for doing such changes :-)
> #ifdef SBE_MAP_DEBUG
> pr_warning("%s: io remapped from phys %x to virt %x\n",
> -hi->devname, (u_int32_t) hi->addr[j],
> (u_int32_t) hi->addr_mapped[j]);
> +hi->devname, (u_int32_t) hi->addr[j],
> +(u_int32_t) hi->addr_mapped[j]);
This one is fine, too. The others, I wouldn't touch them.
--
Krzysztof Halasa
Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP
Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warsaw, Poland
--
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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
Daeseok Youn daeseok.y...@gmail.com writes: clean up checkpatch.pl warnings: WARNING: Line length over 80 characters This warning should be long gone IMHO. It does more harm than good. unsigned char *ucp = (unsigned char *) hi-mfg_info.data; pr_info(eeprom[00]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3), *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7)); + *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3), + *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7)); pr_info(eeprom[08]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp + 11), *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15)); + *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp + 11), + *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15)); pr_info(eeprom[16]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp + 19), *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23)); + *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp + 19), + *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23)); pr_info(eeprom[24]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp + 27), *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31)); + *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp + 27), + *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31)); pr_info(eeprom[32]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp + 35), *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39)); + *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp + 35), + *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39)); pr_info(eeprom[40]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp + 43), *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47)); + *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp + 43), + *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47)); } This one is probably an improvement, though... why not use some existing *hex_dump*() instead? - * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is first - * found + * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is + * fisrt found ^ I wonder what's your exact procedure for doing such changes :-) #ifdef SBE_MAP_DEBUG pr_warning(%s: io remapped from phys %x to virt %x\n, -hi-devname, (u_int32_t) hi-addr[j], (u_int32_t) hi-addr_mapped[j]); +hi-devname, (u_int32_t) hi-addr[j], +(u_int32_t) hi-addr_mapped[j]); This one is fine, too. The others, I wouldn't touch them. -- Krzysztof Halasa Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warsaw, Poland -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
2014-03-03 15:46 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Hałasa khal...@piap.pl: Daeseok Youn daeseok.y...@gmail.com writes: clean up checkpatch.pl warnings: WARNING: Line length over 80 characters This warning should be long gone IMHO. It does more harm than good. unsigned char *ucp = (unsigned char *) hi-mfg_info.data; pr_info(eeprom[00]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3), *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7)); + *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3), + *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7)); pr_info(eeprom[08]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp + 11), *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15)); + *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp + 11), + *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15)); pr_info(eeprom[16]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp + 19), *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23)); + *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp + 19), + *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23)); pr_info(eeprom[24]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp + 27), *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31)); + *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp + 27), + *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31)); pr_info(eeprom[32]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp + 35), *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39)); + *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp + 35), + *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39)); pr_info(eeprom[40]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n, - *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp + 43), *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47)); + *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp + 43), + *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47)); } This one is probably an improvement, though... why not use some existing *hex_dump*() instead? OK. but this patch is only for fix line length over 80 characters, right? If it can be improved as your comment, it must be in another patch. - * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is first - * found + * match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is + * fisrt found ^ I wonder what's your exact procedure for doing such changes :-) first word is over 80 line character after applying my previous patch(2/5) (previous patch is already merged to staging-next tree :-)) #ifdef SBE_MAP_DEBUG pr_warning(%s: io remapped from phys %x to virt %x\n, -hi-devname, (u_int32_t) hi-addr[j], (u_int32_t) hi-addr_mapped[j]); +hi-devname, (u_int32_t) hi-addr[j], +(u_int32_t) hi-addr_mapped[j]); This one is fine, too. The others, I wouldn't touch them. this line, same reason above one. -- Krzysztof Halasa Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP Al. Jerozolimskie 202, 02-486 Warsaw, Poland -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 16:01 +0900, DaeSeok Youn wrote: 2014-03-03 15:46 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Hałasa khal...@piap.pl: why not use some existing *hex_dump*() instead? OK. but this patch is only for fix line length over 80 characters, right? If it can be improved as your comment, it must be in another patch. Not true. Always strive to improve the code in preference to shutting up checkpatch warnings. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
I think line break is a solution about long line warning. And replacing with hex_dump() is better than managing with another patch. So I said this improvement is separated with another patch. Just my opinion. If I'm wrong, I try to change as Krzysztof's comment in same patch. Thanks. Daeseok Youn. 2014-03-03 16:10 GMT+09:00 Joe Perches j...@perches.com: On Mon, 2014-03-03 at 16:01 +0900, DaeSeok Youn wrote: 2014-03-03 15:46 GMT+09:00 Krzysztof Hałasa khal...@piap.pl: why not use some existing *hex_dump*() instead? OK. but this patch is only for fix line length over 80 characters, right? If it can be improved as your comment, it must be in another patch. Not true. Always strive to improve the code in preference to shutting up checkpatch warnings. -- 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/
[PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
clean up checkpatch.pl warnings:
WARNING: Line length over 80 characters
Signed-off-by: Daeseok Youn
---
drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c | 45 --
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c b/drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c
index 85040bb..d6ccbd9 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c
@@ -37,7 +37,8 @@ extern int drvr_state;
/* forward references */
voidc4_stopwd(ci_t *);
-struct net_device * __init c4_add_dev(hdw_info_t *, int, unsigned long,
unsigned long, int, int);
+struct net_device * __init c4_add_dev(hdw_info_t *, int, unsigned long,
+ unsigned long, int, int);
struct s_hdw_info hdw_info[MAX_BOARDS];
@@ -104,24 +105,31 @@ hdw_sn_get(hdw_info_t *hi, int brdno)
addr = (long) hi->addr_mapped[1] + EEPROM_OFFSET;
/* read EEPROM with largest known format size... */
- pmc_eeprom_read_buffer(addr, 0, (char *)hi->mfg_info.data,
sizeof(FLD_TYPE2));
+ pmc_eeprom_read_buffer(addr, 0, (char *)hi->mfg_info.data,
+ sizeof(FLD_TYPE2));
#if 0
{
unsigned char *ucp = (unsigned char *) >mfg_info.data;
pr_info("eeprom[00]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n",
- *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3),
*(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7));
+ *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3),
+ *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7));
pr_info("eeprom[08]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n",
- *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp +
11), *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15));
+ *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp + 11),
+ *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15));
pr_info("eeprom[16]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n",
- *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp +
19), *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23));
+ *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp + 19),
+ *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23));
pr_info("eeprom[24]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n",
- *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp +
27), *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31));
+ *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp + 27),
+ *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31));
pr_info("eeprom[32]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n",
- *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp +
35), *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39));
+ *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp + 35),
+ *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39));
pr_info("eeprom[40]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n",
- *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp +
43), *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47));
+ *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp + 43),
+ *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47));
}
#endif
#if 0
@@ -230,10 +238,11 @@ c4_hdw_init(struct pci_dev *pdev, int found)
return 0;
}
- if (pdev->bus) /* obtain bus number */
+ /* obtain bus number */
+ if (pdev->bus)
busno = pdev->bus->number;
else
- busno = 0; /* default for system PCI
inconsistency */
+ busno = 0; /* default for system PCI inconsistency */
slot = pdev->devfn & ~0x07;
/*
@@ -246,8 +255,8 @@ c4_hdw_init(struct pci_dev *pdev, int found)
for (i = 0, hi = hdw_info; i < MAX_BOARDS; i++, hi++)
{
/*
-* match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is
first
-* found
+* match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is
+* fisrt found
*/
if ((hi->pci_slot == 0xff) || /* new board */
((hi->pci_slot == slot) && (hi->bus == pdev->bus)))
@@ -256,13 +265,14 @@ c4_hdw_init(struct pci_dev *pdev, int found)
if (i == MAX_BOARDS)/* no match in above loop means MAX
* exceeded */
{
- pr_warning("exceeded number of allowed devices (>%d)?\n",
MAX_BOARDS);
+ pr_warning("exceeded number of allowed devices (>%d)?\n",
+ MAX_BOARDS);
[PATCH 3/5 v2] Staging: cxt1e1: Fix line length over 80 characters in hwprobe.c
clean up checkpatch.pl warnings:
WARNING: Line length over 80 characters
Signed-off-by: Daeseok Youn daeseok.y...@gmail.com
---
drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c | 45 --
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c b/drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c
index 85040bb..d6ccbd9 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/cxt1e1/hwprobe.c
@@ -37,7 +37,8 @@ extern int drvr_state;
/* forward references */
voidc4_stopwd(ci_t *);
-struct net_device * __init c4_add_dev(hdw_info_t *, int, unsigned long,
unsigned long, int, int);
+struct net_device * __init c4_add_dev(hdw_info_t *, int, unsigned long,
+ unsigned long, int, int);
struct s_hdw_info hdw_info[MAX_BOARDS];
@@ -104,24 +105,31 @@ hdw_sn_get(hdw_info_t *hi, int brdno)
addr = (long) hi-addr_mapped[1] + EEPROM_OFFSET;
/* read EEPROM with largest known format size... */
- pmc_eeprom_read_buffer(addr, 0, (char *)hi-mfg_info.data,
sizeof(FLD_TYPE2));
+ pmc_eeprom_read_buffer(addr, 0, (char *)hi-mfg_info.data,
+ sizeof(FLD_TYPE2));
#if 0
{
unsigned char *ucp = (unsigned char *) hi-mfg_info.data;
pr_info(eeprom[00]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n,
- *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3),
*(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7));
+ *(ucp + 0), *(ucp + 1), *(ucp + 2), *(ucp + 3),
+ *(ucp + 4), *(ucp + 5), *(ucp + 6), *(ucp + 7));
pr_info(eeprom[08]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n,
- *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp +
11), *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15));
+ *(ucp + 8), *(ucp + 9), *(ucp + 10), *(ucp + 11),
+ *(ucp + 12), *(ucp + 13), *(ucp + 14), *(ucp + 15));
pr_info(eeprom[16]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n,
- *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp +
19), *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23));
+ *(ucp + 16), *(ucp + 17), *(ucp + 18), *(ucp + 19),
+ *(ucp + 20), *(ucp + 21), *(ucp + 22), *(ucp + 23));
pr_info(eeprom[24]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n,
- *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp +
27), *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31));
+ *(ucp + 24), *(ucp + 25), *(ucp + 26), *(ucp + 27),
+ *(ucp + 28), *(ucp + 29), *(ucp + 30), *(ucp + 31));
pr_info(eeprom[32]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n,
- *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp +
35), *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39));
+ *(ucp + 32), *(ucp + 33), *(ucp + 34), *(ucp + 35),
+ *(ucp + 36), *(ucp + 37), *(ucp + 38), *(ucp + 39));
pr_info(eeprom[40]: %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x
%02x\n,
- *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp +
43), *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47));
+ *(ucp + 40), *(ucp + 41), *(ucp + 42), *(ucp + 43),
+ *(ucp + 44), *(ucp + 45), *(ucp + 46), *(ucp + 47));
}
#endif
#if 0
@@ -230,10 +238,11 @@ c4_hdw_init(struct pci_dev *pdev, int found)
return 0;
}
- if (pdev-bus) /* obtain bus number */
+ /* obtain bus number */
+ if (pdev-bus)
busno = pdev-bus-number;
else
- busno = 0; /* default for system PCI
inconsistency */
+ busno = 0; /* default for system PCI inconsistency */
slot = pdev-devfn ~0x07;
/*
@@ -246,8 +255,8 @@ c4_hdw_init(struct pci_dev *pdev, int found)
for (i = 0, hi = hdw_info; i MAX_BOARDS; i++, hi++)
{
/*
-* match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is
first
-* found
+* match with board's first found interface, otherwise this is
+* fisrt found
*/
if ((hi-pci_slot == 0xff) || /* new board */
((hi-pci_slot == slot) (hi-bus == pdev-bus)))
@@ -256,13 +265,14 @@ c4_hdw_init(struct pci_dev *pdev, int found)
if (i == MAX_BOARDS)/* no match in above loop means MAX
* exceeded */
{
- pr_warning(exceeded number of allowed devices (%d)?\n,
MAX_BOARDS);
+ pr_warning(exceeded number of allowed devices (%d)?\n,
+ MAX_BOARDS);
return 0;
