[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120208.185244.1488314318862923939.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:52:44 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: joe@...ches.com
Cc: gregory.v.rose@...el.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, gospo@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net 2/8] igb: fix vf lookup
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:49:40 -0800
> On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 23:42 +0000, Rose, Gregory V wrote:
>> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
> []
>> > @@ -5012,7 +5012,8 @@ static int igb_find_enabled_vfs(struct igb_adapter
>> > *adapter)
>> > vf_devfn = pdev->devfn + 0x80;
>> > pvfdev = pci_get_device(hw->vendor_id, device_id, NULL);
>> > while (pvfdev) {
>> > - if (pvfdev->devfn == vf_devfn)
>> > + if (pvfdev->devfn == vf_devfn &&
>> > + (pvfdev->bus->number >= pdev->bus->number))
>> > vfs_found++;
> []
>> I'll fix this one too. You start leaning on checkpatch and you get lazy I guess.
>
> I suppose an indentation rule could be created when
> arguments on multiple lines don't align at the open
> parenthesis, but I'm not going to rewrite emacs
> indentation rules.
>
> Presumably it should only be used with --strict.
>
> Anyone think multiple line tests with inequivalent uses
> of parentheses like this one should be noted as well?
Actually I thought this case was perfectly fine.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists