linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Staging: fbtft: fbtft-bus: fixed extra space and parenthesis issue

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: <2023040814-unfixable-recognize-73d0@gregkh>
Date:   Sat, 8 Apr 2023 10:22:35 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Deepanshu Kartikey <kartikey406@...il.com>
Cc:     dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: fbtft: fbtft-bus: fixed extra space and
 parenthesis issue

On Sat, Apr 08, 2023 at 10:33:23AM +0530, Deepanshu Kartikey wrote:
> Fixed a coding styling issue
> 
> Signed-off-by: Deepanshu Kartikey <kartikey406@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c
> index 3d422bc11641..02a16671f2a1 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c
> @@ -62,9 +62,9 @@ out:									      \
>  }                                                                             \
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(func);
>  
> -define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg8_bus8, u8, u8, )
> +define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg8_bus8, u8, u8)
>  define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg16_bus8, __be16, u16, cpu_to_be16)
> -define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg16_bus16, u16, u16, )
> +define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg16_bus16, u16, u16)
>  
>  void fbtft_write_reg8_bus9(struct fbtft_par *par, int len, ...)
>  {
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 
> 

Any specific reason why you did not test-build your patch before sending
it?