linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Staging: comedi: Fix WARNING issue in s626.c

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

Message-ID: <573C3576.6070301@mev.co.uk>
Date:	Wed, 18 May 2016 10:27:18 +0100
From:	Ian Abbott <abbotti@....co.uk>
To:	Ravishankar Karkala Mallikarjunayya <ravishankarkm32@...il.com>,
	hsweeten@...ionengravers.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Staging: comedi: Fix WARNING issue in s626.c

On 17/05/16 11:13, Ravishankar Karkala Mallikarjunayya wrote:
> This is a patch to the s626.c file that fixes up a Block comments
> issues found by the checkpatch.pl tool.
>
> i.e. Block comments use a trailing */ on a separate line
>
> Signed-off-by: Ravishankar Karkala Mallikarjunayya <ravishankarkm32@...il.com>
> ---
>   drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/s626.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>   1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>


I guess this is patch is a replacement for your earlier
"[PATCH 1/4] Staging: comedi: Fix WARNING issue in s626.c". The usual 
practice is to keep the same patch numbering and to add a "v2" like 
this: "[PATCH v2 1/4] Staging: comedi: Fix WARNING issue in s626.c". 
Then add a comment below the "---" line describing what has changed in 
version 2 of the patch. Remember that Greg and the other higher up 
maintainers have to sift through hundreds (or at least a large number) 
of patches a day, so the easier you make it for them, the better.

> diff --git a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/s626.c b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/s626.c
> index c5e0863..0e1f535 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/s626.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/s626.c
> @@ -76,24 +76,38 @@ struct s626_buffer_dma {
>
>   struct s626_private {
>   	uint8_t ai_cmd_running;		/* ai_cmd is running */
> -	unsigned int ai_sample_timer;	/* time between samples in
> -					 * units of the timer */
> +	unsigned int ai_sample_timer;	/*
> +					 * time between samples in
> +					 * units of the timer
> +					 */
>   	int ai_convert_count;		/* conversion counter */
> -	unsigned int ai_convert_timer;	/* time between conversion in
> -					 * units of the timer */
> -	uint16_t counter_int_enabs;	/* counter interrupt enable mask
> -					 * for MISC2 register */
> +	unsigned int ai_convert_timer;	/*
> +					 * time between conversion in
> +					 * units of the timer
> +					 */
> +	u16 counter_int_enabs;	/*
> +					 * counter interrupt enable mask
> +					 * for MISC2 register
> +					 */
>   	uint8_t adc_items;		/* number of items in ADC poll list */
> -	struct s626_buffer_dma rps_buf;	/* DMA buffer used to hold ADC (RPS1)
> -					 * program */
> -	struct s626_buffer_dma ana_buf;	/* DMA buffer used to receive ADC data
> -					 * and hold DAC data */
> -	uint32_t *dac_wbuf;		/* pointer to logical adrs of DMA buffer
> -					 * used to hold DAC data */
> +	struct s626_buffer_dma rps_buf;	/*
> +					 * DMA buffer used to hold ADC (RPS1)
> +					 * program
> +					 */
> +	struct s626_buffer_dma ana_buf;	/*
> +					 * DMA buffer used to receive ADC data
> +					 * and hold DAC data
> +					 */
> +	u32 *dac_wbuf;		/*
> +					 * pointer to logical adrs of DMA buffer
> +					 * used to hold DAC data
> +					 */
>   	uint16_t dacpol;		/* image of DAC polarity register */
>   	uint8_t trim_setpoint[12];	/* images of TrimDAC setpoints */
> -	uint32_t i2c_adrs;		/* I2C device address for onboard EEPROM
> -					 * (board rev dependent) */
> +	u32 i2c_adrs;		/*
> +					 * I2C device address for onboard EEPROM
> +					 * (board rev dependent)
> +					 */
>   };

There's something weird going on above.  In addition to reformatting the 
comments, it's also replacing the type descriptors of some of the 
members (using `u32` instead of `uint32_t` etc.).  It looks like bits of 
the patches from your earlier series have crept into this one.

-- 
-=( Ian Abbott @ MEV Ltd.    E-mail: <abbotti@....co.uk> )=-
-=(                          Web: http://www.mev.co.uk/  )=-