netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/8] net: phy: correct format of block comments

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <f4016ec16e174e959bfb82f5ce77c260@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jun 2021 06:18:38 +0000
From:   liweihang <liweihang@...wei.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "hkallweit1@...il.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        liangwenpeng <liangwenpeng@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/8] net: phy: correct format of block comments

On 2021/6/11 22:36, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 02:36:53PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
>> From: Wenpeng Liang <liangwenpeng@...wei.com>
>>
>> Block comments should not use a trailing */ on a separate line and every
>> line of a block comment should start with an '*'.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wenpeng Liang <liangwenpeng@...wei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@...wei.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/phy/lxt.c      | 6 +++---
>>  drivers/net/phy/national.c | 6 ++++--
>>  drivers/net/phy/phy-core.c | 3 ++-
>>  drivers/net/phy/phylink.c  | 9 ++++++---
>>  drivers/net/phy/vitesse.c  | 3 ++-
>>  5 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/lxt.c b/drivers/net/phy/lxt.c
>> index bde3356..5e00910 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/phy/lxt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/lxt.c
>> @@ -241,9 +241,9 @@ static int lxt973a2_read_status(struct phy_device *phydev)
>>  			if (lpa < 0)
>>  				return lpa;
>>  
>> -			/* If both registers are equal, it is suspect but not
>> -			* impossible, hence a new try
>> -			*/
>> +		/* If both registers are equal, it is suspect but not
>> +		 * impossible, hence a new try
>> +		 */
>>  		} while (lpa == adv && retry--);
> 
> Please indicate in the commit message why you changed the indentation.
> 
>        Andrew
> 

Sure, thanks.

Weihang