linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: Alignment should match open parenthesis

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20231021133527.GB12776@ubuntu>
Date:   Sat, 21 Oct 2023 06:35:27 -0700
From:   Nandha Kumar Singaram <nandhakumar.singaram@...il.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>,
        greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kumaran.4353@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: Alignment should match open parenthesis

greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kumaran.4353@...il.com
Bcc: 
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: Alignment should match open parenthesis
Reply-To: 
In-Reply-To: <2023102131-slacker-lily-28ff@...gkh>

On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 11:48:32AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 02:39:49PM -0700, Nandha Kumar Singaram wrote:
> > Adhere to linux coding style. Reported by checkpatch.pl:
> > CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nandha Kumar Singaram <nandhakumar.singaram@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c | 14 +++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c
> > index cdbb42cd413b..405c8e78aa72 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c
> > @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ static int gb_camera_operation_sync_flags(struct gb_connection *connection,
> >  }
> >  
> >  static int gb_camera_get_max_pkt_size(struct gb_camera *gcam,
> > -		struct gb_camera_configure_streams_response *resp)
> > +				      struct gb_camera_configure_streams_response *resp)
> >  {
> >  	unsigned int max_pkt_size = 0;
> >  	unsigned int i;
> > @@ -267,8 +267,7 @@ static int gb_camera_get_max_pkt_size(struct gb_camera *gcam,
> >   * Validate the stream configuration response verifying padding is correctly
> >   * set and the returned number of streams is supported
> >   */
> > -static const int gb_camera_configure_streams_validate_response(
> > -		struct gb_camera *gcam,
> > +static const int gb_camera_configure_streams_validate_response(struct gb_camera *gcam,
> 
> Why change this line?
>
did these Code change to fix CHECK: Lines should not end with a '(' reported by
checkpatch.pl

> It's fine, but then:
> 
> >  		struct gb_camera_configure_streams_response *resp,
> >  		unsigned int nstreams)
> 
> These lines are not fixed up?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Fixing these lines results in another checkpatch check(CHECK: line length 
of 113 exceeds 100 columns) so didn't added any change

Thanks,
Nandha Kumar