linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3] staging: vc04_services: vchiq

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]

Message-ID: <CAMJX__Qx_MyOmqiphz_Fg0X8itu8PDtNNpFTKqxGabK6v1bsLg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 May 2020 13:06:08 +0100
From:   John Oldman <john.oldman60@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     John Oldman <john.oldman@...ehill.co.uk>, nsaenzjulienne@...e.de,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] staging: vc04_services: vchiq_connected.c: Block
 comment alignment

yea I agree, will re-submit...
Cheers
john

On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 12:58, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 11:13:08AM +0100, John Oldman wrote:
> > Coding style issue
> > This patch clears the checkpatch.pl "Block comments should align the * on each line" warning.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: John Oldman <john.oldman@...ehill.co.uk>
> > ---
> > v1: Initial attempt.
> > v2: Resubmitted with shorter comment line, as suggested by Greg KH.
> > v3: Resubmitted with descriptiuon text moved into the comment area.
> >
> >  .../interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_connected.c     | 32 +++++++++----------
> >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_connected.c b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_connected.c
> > index 1640906e3929..993535bbc479 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_connected.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_connected.c
> > @@ -15,10 +15,10 @@ static   int                        g_once_init;
> >  static   struct mutex               g_connected_mutex;
> >
> >  /****************************************************************************
> > -*
> > -* Function to initialize our lock.
> > -*
> > -***************************************************************************/
> > + *
> > + * Function to initialize our lock.
> > + *
> > + ***************************************************************************/
> >
> >  static void connected_init(void)
>
> Shouldn't that really be written as:
>
> /* Function to initialize our lock */
> static void connect_init(void);
>
>
> No need for the /****** mess, and no need for the blank line.
>
> Simple and clean is best.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h