[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8a714674-fecf-4067-97e4-59e28816c854@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 10:37:21 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc: "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manisadhasivam.linux@...il.com>,
Can Guo <cang@....qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Move clock gating sysfs entries to ufs-sysfs.c
On 1/22/25 11:31 PM, Avri Altman wrote:
>> On 1/22/25 6:36 AM, Avri Altman wrote:
>>> +static ssize_t
>>> +clkgate_enable_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
>>> + char *buf)
>>> +{
>>
>> The above formatting does not conform to the Linux kernel coding style.
>> Please fix this, e.g. by running git clang-format HEAD^ && git commit --amend
>> on the git branch with this patch.
> Done.
> AFAIK, there hasn't been a formal announcement that `clang-format` should replace `checkpatch` for Linux kernel development.
> And yes, while checkpatch --strict accepted the above formatting, clang-format did make changes.
Hi Avri,
Nobody ever required to use clang-format as far as I know.
With my email I was referring to the requirement that the return type
and the function name occur on the same line.
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists