[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKbEznvdKJx_t2OcYfAJuAP8FVpTjup63Ct6aFvSYuK=-B061A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 14:30:41 +0900
From: Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@...il.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>, Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/9] iio: buffer: Fix checkpatch.pl warning
On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 2:35 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 May 2025 23:25:53 +0900
> Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Remove the following trivial warning:
> > "WARNING: Block comments should align the * on each line"
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@...il.com>
> Applied.
>
> As a general rule don't send unrelated cleanup in an RFC series
> doing something interesting! They might get missed.
Well, since the patches modify the same file, I considered them
dependent and grouped them into a single series. But now realize it
would be more appropriate to split patches logically.
Thanks for pointing it out.
Gyeyoung
> Jonathan
> > ---
> > drivers/iio/buffer/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/buffer/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c b/drivers/iio/buffer/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c
> > index c06515987e7a..9bf75dee7ff8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/buffer/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/buffer/industrialio-triggered-buffer.c
> > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > - /*
> > +/*
> > * Copyright (c) 2012 Analog Devices, Inc.
> > * Author: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
> > */
> >
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists