| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:32:30 +0100
From: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
To: Quytelda Kahja <quytelda@...alin.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
hans.verkuil@...co.com, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Staging: bcm2048: Fix function argument alignment in
radio-bcm2048.c.
On 02/27/2018 02:53 AM, Quytelda Kahja wrote:
> Hans,
>
> Thank you very much for your input on the patch; however this patch
> has already been applied to the staging tree. Additionally:
I have no record of this being applied through linux-media. Did someone
else pick this up? Greg perhaps?
>> What coding style problem? You should give a short description of
>> what you are fixing.
> The subject of the patch (which becomes the subject of the email when
> using `git format-patch`) describes the change more fully: "Staging:
> bcm2048: Fix function argument alignment in radio-bcm2048.c". It's a
> really trivial patch, so there's not too much to say. That extra
> comment is just redundant, I suppose.
Usually you just show the warnings that gcc or sparse or whatever
produced.
>
>> Just drop this change: it will replace one warning (non-aligned) with
>> another (> 80 cols).
> Breaking the 80 character line limit is arguably excusable for this
> code because of the 36 character function name and 30 character
> constant name; additionally, it has been said that the 80 character
> line limit will probably be increased in the future since we run
> modern machines that aren't limited to 80 character terminals anymore,
> so this warning may soon be irrelevant anyway.
I know people who would be very annoyed if the 80 char limit is lifted.
Anyway, in the end you look at whether a patch is worth it or not,
and this part isn't.
But if it is already applied by someone then this is all moot.
Regards,
Hans
>
> Thank you,
> Quytelda Kahja
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 5:51 AM, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl> wrote:
>> On 02/20/2018 07:53 AM, Quytelda Kahja wrote:
>>> Fix a coding style problem.
>>
>> What coding style problem? You should give a short description of
>> what you are fixing.
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Quytelda Kahja <quytelda@...alin.org>
>>> ---
>>> This is the patch without the unnecessary fixes for line length.
>>>
>>> drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c b/drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c
>>> index 06d1920150da..f38a4f2acdde 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c
>>> @@ -1864,7 +1864,7 @@ static int bcm2048_probe(struct bcm2048_device *bdev)
>>> goto unlock;
>>>
>>> err = bcm2048_set_fm_search_rssi_threshold(bdev,
>>> - BCM2048_DEFAULT_RSSI_THRESHOLD);
>>> + BCM2048_DEFAULT_RSSI_THRESHOLD);
>>> if (err < 0)
>>> goto unlock;
>>>
>>
>> Just drop this change: it will replace one warning (non-aligned) with
>> another (> 80 cols).
>>
>> This code is fine as it is.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Hans
>>
>>> @@ -1942,9 +1942,9 @@ static irqreturn_t bcm2048_handler(int irq, void *dev)
>>> */
>>> #define property_write(prop, type, mask, check) \
>>> static ssize_t bcm2048_##prop##_write(struct device *dev, \
>>> - struct device_attribute *attr, \
>>> - const char *buf, \
>>> - size_t count) \
>>> + struct device_attribute *attr, \
>>> + const char *buf, \
>>> + size_t count) \
>>> { \
>>> struct bcm2048_device *bdev = dev_get_drvdata(dev); \
>>> type value; \
>>> @@ -1966,8 +1966,8 @@ static ssize_t bcm2048_##prop##_write(struct device *dev, \
>>>
>>> #define property_read(prop, mask) \
>>> static ssize_t bcm2048_##prop##_read(struct device *dev, \
>>> - struct device_attribute *attr, \
>>> - char *buf) \
>>> + struct device_attribute *attr, \
>>> + char *buf) \
>>> { \
>>> struct bcm2048_device *bdev = dev_get_drvdata(dev); \
>>> int value; \
>>> @@ -1985,8 +1985,8 @@ static ssize_t bcm2048_##prop##_read(struct device *dev, \
>>>
>>> #define property_signed_read(prop, size, mask) \
>>> static ssize_t bcm2048_##prop##_read(struct device *dev, \
>>> - struct device_attribute *attr, \
>>> - char *buf) \
>>> + struct device_attribute *attr, \
>>> + char *buf) \
>>> { \
>>> struct bcm2048_device *bdev = dev_get_drvdata(dev); \
>>> size value; \
>>> @@ -2005,8 +2005,8 @@ property_read(prop, mask) \
>>>
>>> #define property_str_read(prop, size) \
>>> static ssize_t bcm2048_##prop##_read(struct device *dev, \
>>> - struct device_attribute *attr, \
>>> - char *buf) \
>>> + struct device_attribute *attr, \
>>> + char *buf) \
>>> { \
>>> struct bcm2048_device *bdev = dev_get_drvdata(dev); \
>>> int count; \
>>> @@ -2175,7 +2175,7 @@ static int bcm2048_fops_release(struct file *file)
>>> }
>>>
>>> static __poll_t bcm2048_fops_poll(struct file *file,
>>> - struct poll_table_struct *pts)
>>> + struct poll_table_struct *pts)
>>> {
>>> struct bcm2048_device *bdev = video_drvdata(file);
>>> __poll_t retval = 0;
>>>
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists