linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/21] spi: s3c64xx: add missing blank line after declaration

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]

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 09:54:46 +0000
From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>
Cc: broonie@...nel.org, andi.shyti@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de,
 robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
 alim.akhtar@...sung.com, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, andre.draszik@...aro.org,
 peter.griffin@...aro.org, kernel-team@...roid.com, willmcvicker@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/21] spi: s3c64xx: add missing blank line after
 declaration



On 1/23/24 19:28, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 9:34 AM Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> Add missing blank line after declaration. Move initialization in the
>> body of the function.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c | 3 ++-
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> index f5474f3b3920..2abf5994080a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> @@ -1273,8 +1273,9 @@ static int s3c64xx_spi_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>  {
>>         struct spi_controller *host = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>         struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd = spi_controller_get_devdata(host);
>> +       int ret;
>>
>> -       int ret = spi_controller_suspend(host);
>> +       ret = spi_controller_suspend(host);
> 
> Why not just moving the empty line below the declaration block,
> keeping the initialization on the variable declaration line?
> 

just a matter of personal preference. I find it ugly to do an
initialization at variable declaration and then to immediately check the
return value in the body of the function. But I'll do as you say, just
cosmetics anyway.