linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Staging: Silicom: Bypasslib: Fixed a couple of checkpatch.pl warnings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 23 May 2014 22:31:41 -0700
From:	Chaitanya Hazarey <c@...io>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	christoph.kohl@...nline.de,
	michael.hoefler@...dium.uni-erlangen.de, rupert@...ch.net,
	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: Silicom: Bypasslib: Fixed a couple of
 checkpatch.pl warnings

Hey Dan,

Thanks for your patience, I have resubmitted via a new email. Hope that works.

Thanks,

Chaitanya

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 02:39:43PM -0700, Chaitanya Hazarey wrote:
>> Added a blank line after declarations to fix the following warnings issued by checkpatch.pl:
>>
>> drivers/staging/silicom/bypasslib/bypass.c:138: WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
>> drivers/staging/silicom/bypasslib/bypass.c:189: WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chaitanya Hazarey <c@...io>
>
> Still doesn't apply, I'm afraid.
>
>> ---
>>  drivers/staging/silicom/bypasslib/bypass.c |    2 ++
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/silicom/bypasslib/bypass.c b/drivers/staging/silicom/bypasslib/bypass.c
>> index a58251f..8e714a8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/silicom/bypasslib/bypass.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/silicom/bypasslib/bypass.c
>> @@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ static int doit(int cmd, int if_index, int *data)
>>  static int is_dev_sd(int if_index)
>>  {
>>       int ret = 0;
>> +
>>       SET_BPLIB_INT_FN(is_bypass, int, if_index, ret);
>>       return ret >= 0 ? 1 : 0;
>>  }
>> @@ -186,6 +187,7 @@ static int is_bypass_dev(int if_index)
>>  static int is_bypass(int if_index)
>>  {
>>       int ret = 0;
>> +
>>       SET_BPLIB_INT_FN(is_bypass, int, if_index, ret);
>>       if (ret < 0)
>
> There was supposed to be a blank line between the call to
> SET_BPLIB_INT_FN() and the return check and it got deleted for some
> reason.
>
> regards,
> dan carpetner
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/