[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.21.1.2001221034510.8@nippy.intranet>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 10:53:04 +1100 (AEDT)
From: Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Laurent Vivier <laurent@...ier.eu>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 05/12] net/sonic: Fix receive buffer handling
On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 08:22:08 +1100
> Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au> wrote:
>
> >
> > +/* Return the array index corresponding to a given Receive Buffer pointer. */
> > +
> > +static inline int index_from_addr(struct sonic_local *lp, dma_addr_t addr,
> > + unsigned int last)
>
> Why the blank line between comment and the start of the function?
>
The driver mostly uses this style:
/*
* We have a good packet(s), pass it/them up the network stack.
*/
static void sonic_rx(struct net_device *dev)
{
}
To my eyes, style I used is the closest readable approximation of the
existing style that doesn't upset checkpatch.
Anyway, I will remove the blank lines.
> Also, the kernel standard is not to use the inline keyword on functions
> and let the compiler decide to inline if it wants to.
OK.
Thanks for your review.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists