linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] [PATCH V2 4/4] staging:gpib:agilent

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: <2025021742-shoplift-arrogant-937f@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 11:39:06 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Ravi Kumar kairi <kumarkairiravi@...il.com>
Cc: dpenkler@...il.com, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org,
	dan.carpenter@...aro.org, rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] [PATCH V2 4/4] staging:gpib:agilent_82350b: Fix
 Indent issue with block

On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 04:00:38PM +0530, Ravi Kumar kairi wrote:
> From: Ravi Kumar Kairi <kumarkairiravi@...il.com>
> 
> There was a empty line, which was causing the checkpatch script to think
> it's a single line statment, after removing the empty line it's no
> longer asking to check that line.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ravi Kumar Kairi <kumarkairiravi@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/gpib/agilent_82350b/agilent_82350b.c | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/gpib/agilent_82350b/agilent_82350b.c b/drivers/staging/gpib/agilent_82350b/agilent_82350b.c
> index b6871eb3c8..1d644d000a 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/gpib/agilent_82350b/agilent_82350b.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/gpib/agilent_82350b/agilent_82350b.c
> @@ -228,7 +228,6 @@ static int agilent_82350b_accel_write(gpib_board_t *board, uint8_t *buffer, size
>  		return retval;
>  
>  	if (send_eoi) {
> -
>  		retval = agilent_82350b_write(board, buffer + fifotransferlength, 1, send_eoi,
>  					      &num_bytes);
>  		*bytes_written += num_bytes;

The subject line is really odd as this change has nothing to do with
indentation :(

thanks,

greg k-h