[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1404277090.14624.62.camel@joe-AO725>
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 21:58:10 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@...il.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Varka Bhadram <varkab@...c.in>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-zigbee-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Linux-zigbee-devel] [PATCH net-next v3] 6lowpan: mac802154:
fix coding style issues
On Tue, 2014-07-01 at 21:49 -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 2014-07-01 21:40 GMT-07:00 Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>:
> > On Tue, 2014-07-01 at 21:20 -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> 2014-07-01 20:31 GMT-07:00 Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@...il.com>:
> >> > This patch fixed the coding style issues reported by checkpatch.pl
> >> >
> >> > following issues fixed:
> >> > CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
> >>
> >> It seems to me like checkpatch.pl should have a special case for
> >> networking code and that specific condition because fixing things to
> >> make checkpatch.pl happy seems not to agree with the general coding
> >> style recommended and enforced in the networking code.
> >
> > In networking (net/ and drivers/net) alignment of multiline statements
> > _should_ align to the open parenthesis and checkpatch already has a
> > specific check for those directories.
> >
> >> I just saw that new warning added popping up on a bunch of drivers
> >> that were properly fixed to match the networking coding style before
> >> submission.
> >
> > Is there anything you want changed in checkpatch?
> > If so, why?
>
> It looks to me like it does some improper flagging when the multi-line
> statements are aligned to the closest tab after the opening
> parenthesis, e.g:
>
> CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
> #84: FILE: drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bcmsysport.c:84:
> + __raw_writel(upper_32_bits(addr) & DESC_ADDR_HI_MASK,
> + d + DESC_ADDR_HI_STATUS_LEN);
>
> gmail will probably render this incorrectly and does replace tabs with
> spaces, but if you run the script manually on that specific file, it
> will return some (false?) positives matches.
>
> this is with checkpath.pl from net-next/master at
> 763e0ecd72fe90fdd73bb1aa1b72caf8381d2fff ("bonding: allow to add vlans
> on top of empty bond")
No, it's not a false positive.
The code is currently:
__raw_writel(upper_32_bits(addr) & DESC_ADDR_HI_MASK,
d + DESC_ADDR_HI_STATUS_LEN);
1st line has 1 leading tab,
2nd line has 3 leading tabs
For networking code style, this should be:
__raw_writel(upper_32_bits(addr) & DESC_ADDR_HI_MASK,
d + DESC_ADDR_HI_STATUS_LEN);
1st line has 1 leading tab,
2nd line has 2 leading tabs followed by 5 leading spaces
This aligns the 2nd line arguments to the position immediately
after the open parenthesis.
--
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