[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAtXAHd9AV4Ca4HyOOUEd9bgQztL7FaDRQZONVs+XA2-qEbdDw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 09:18:11 -0800
From: Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@...us.com>
To: Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...el.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Punnaiah Choudary Kalluri <punnaia@...inx.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] net: macb: Fix coding style issues
Hi all,
thanks for the feedback.
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com> wrote:
> On 7.3.2016 18:13, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>> I'm not usually fond of this type of patches, but I must admit that this
>> series corrects some style issues.
While I was playing around with my fixed-link for macb RFC I was
flooded with warnings,
so I figured I'll fix it while I'm at it. Just makes it easier for
other people to work
on it afterwards I thought.
>
> mac = of_get_mac_address(np);
> if (mac)
> - memcpy(bp->dev->dev_addr, mac, ETH_ALEN);
> + ether_addr_copy(bp->dev->dev_addr, mac);
> else
So don't you like this in general or just would like to have it split
out in a separate patch?
> Also extending scope of variables is not the right way to go. Especially
> when some automation tools are reporting that you should reduce scope of
> use for them. Wolfram is checking it for example.
Alright, understood, I'll address this.
Cheers,
Moritz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists