[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190313123454.GB2202@kadam>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 15:34:54 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Armando Miraglia <arma2ff0@...il.com>
Cc: neil@...wn.name, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Armando Miraglia <armax@...gle.com>,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, sankalpnegi2310@...il.com,
matthias.bgg@...il.com, sr@...x.de,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: mediatek: Attempt to address style issues in
spi-mt7621.c
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 01:24:04PM +0100, Armando Miraglia wrote:
> Running Lindent on the mt7621-spi.c file in drivers/staging I noticed that the
> file contained style issues. This change attempts to address such style
> problems.
>
Don't run lindent. I think checkpatch.pl has a --fix option that might
be better, but once the code is merged then our standard become much
higher for follow up patches.
> Signed-off-by: Armando Miraglia <armax@...gle.com>
> ---
> NOTE: resend this patch to include all mainteners listed by get_mantainers.pl.
> drivers/staging/mt7621-spi/spi-mt7621.c | 27 +++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/mt7621-spi/spi-mt7621.c b/drivers/staging/mt7621-spi/spi-mt7621.c
> index b509f9fe3346..03d53845f8c5 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/mt7621-spi/spi-mt7621.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/mt7621-spi/spi-mt7621.c
> @@ -52,14 +52,14 @@
> #define MT7621_LSB_FIRST BIT(3)
>
> struct mt7621_spi {
> - struct spi_master *master;
> - void __iomem *base;
> - unsigned int sys_freq;
> - unsigned int speed;
> - struct clk *clk;
> - int pending_write;
> -
> - struct mt7621_spi_ops *ops;
> + struct spi_master *master;
> + void __iomem *base;
> + unsigned int sys_freq;
> + unsigned int speed;
> + struct clk *clk;
> + int pending_write;
> +
> + struct mt7621_spi_ops *ops;
The original is fine. I don't encourage people to do fancy indenting
with their local variable declarations inside functions but for a struct
the declarations aren't going to change a lot so people can get fancy
if they want.
The problem with a local is if you need to add a new variable then you
have to re-indent a bunch of unrelated lines or have one out of
alignment line. Most people know this intuitively so they don't get
fancy.
> };
>
> static inline struct mt7621_spi *spidev_to_mt7621_spi(struct spi_device *spi)
> @@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ static int mt7621_spi_setup(struct spi_device *spi)
> struct mt7621_spi *rs = spidev_to_mt7621_spi(spi);
>
> if ((spi->max_speed_hz == 0) ||
> - (spi->max_speed_hz > (rs->sys_freq / 2)))
> + (spi->max_speed_hz > (rs->sys_freq / 2)))
Yeah. Lindent is correct here.
> spi->max_speed_hz = (rs->sys_freq / 2);
>
> if (spi->max_speed_hz < (rs->sys_freq / 4097)) {
> @@ -316,9 +316,10 @@ static int mt7621_spi_setup(struct spi_device *spi)
> }
>
> static const struct of_device_id mt7621_spi_match[] = {
> - { .compatible = "ralink,mt7621-spi" },
> + {.compatible = "ralink,mt7621-spi"},
The original was better.
> {},
> };
> +
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mt7621_spi_match);
No need for a blank. These are closely related.
>
> static int mt7621_spi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> @@ -408,9 +409,9 @@ MODULE_ALIAS("platform:" DRIVER_NAME);
>
> static struct platform_driver mt7621_spi_driver = {
> .driver = {
> - .name = DRIVER_NAME,
> - .of_match_table = mt7621_spi_match,
> - },
> + .name = DRIVER_NAME,
> + .of_match_table = mt7621_spi_match,
> + },
The new indenting is very wrong.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists