linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] staging: media: atomisp: fix style of block comments

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: <9fb53713-e58c-17d9-1553-80d80e4b3863@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 26 Jul 2020 14:49:30 +0530
From:   Rohit K Bharadwaj <bharadwaj.rohit8@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     mchehab@...nel.org, sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] staging: media: atomisp: fix style of block
 comments

On 26/07/20 2:42 pm, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 02:35:10PM +0530, Rohit K Bharadwaj wrote:
>> this patch fixes the coding style of block comments.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rohit K Bharadwaj <bharadwaj.rohit8@...il.com>
>> ---
>> v3: change patch subject prefix
>> v2: split patch into sequence of patches 
>> v1: fix all coding style issues in single patch
>>
>>  .../media/atomisp/pci/sh_css_firmware.c       | 28 +++++++++++++------
>>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/atomisp/pci/sh_css_firmware.c b/drivers/staging/media/atomisp/pci/sh_css_firmware.c
>> index d4ab15b6d1ac..2907aead98b7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/media/atomisp/pci/sh_css_firmware.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/atomisp/pci/sh_css_firmware.c
>> @@ -51,9 +51,12 @@ struct fw_param {
>>  
>>  static struct firmware_header *firmware_header;
>>  
>> -/* The string STR is a place holder
>> +/*
>> + * The string STR is a place holder
>>   * which will be replaced with the actual RELEASE_VERSION
>> - * during package generation. Please do not modify  */
>> + * during package generation. Please do not modify
>> + */
>> +
> 
> Why the blank line?
> 
Sir, I thought that it would improve the readability of the code and would help easily distinguish comments from the variable declaration part, and also since there was a blank line between the start of comment and the static struct firmware_header variable, I thought of putting a blank line after the comment end as well to maintain symmetry.