[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZFzSVciEsAU/pKLB@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 12:32:37 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phylink: constify fwnode arguments
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 01:29:50PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-05-10 at 12:03 +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/phylink.h b/include/linux/phylink.h
> > index 71755c66c162..02c777ad18f2 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/phylink.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/phylink.h
> > @@ -568,7 +568,8 @@ void phylink_generic_validate(struct phylink_config *config,
> > unsigned long *supported,
> > struct phylink_link_state *state);
> >
> > -struct phylink *phylink_create(struct phylink_config *, struct fwnode_handle *,
> > +struct phylink *phylink_create(struct phylink_config *,
> > + const struct fwnode_handle *,
>
> While touching the above, could you please also add the missing params
> name, to keep checkpatch happy and be consistent with the others
> arguments?
For interest, when did naming parameters in a prototype become a
requirement?
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists