[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57f0289a-7d82-4294-a1dc-c6986da0c5ce@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 11:27:21 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Cc: Jean-François Lessard <jefflessard3@...il.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andreas Färber
<afaerber@...e.de>, Boris Gjenero <boris.gjenero@...il.com>,
Christian Hewitt <christianshewitt@...il.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Paolo Sabatino <paolo.sabatino@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] auxdisplay: Add Titanmec TM16xx 7-segment display
controllers driver
On 30/06/2025 09:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 08:12:16AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 29/06/2025 15:18, Jean-François Lessard wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>> + display->leds =
>>> + devm_kcalloc(dev, display->num_leds, sizeof(*display->leds), GFP_KERNEL);
>>
>> Wrong wrapping. Use kernel style, not clang style.
>>
>>
>>> + if (!display->leds)
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>
> Just wondering how .clang-format is official? Note some of the maintainers even
First time I hear above clang style is preferred. Where is it expected?
I assume clang-format is half-working and should not be used blindly,
but fixed to match actual kernel coding style.
> prefer (ugly in some cases in my opinion) style because it's generated by the
> clang-format.
>
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists