lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] staging:rtl8723au: core: Fix error reported by checkpatch.
    Date
    "Sharma, Sanjeev" <Sanjeev_Sharma@mentor.com> writes:
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Jes Sorensen [mailto:Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com]
    > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 2:13 PM
    > To: Sharma, Sanjeev
    > Cc: Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org;
    > linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; devel@driverdev.osuosl.org;
    > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
    > Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging:rtl8723au: core: Fix error reported by checkpatch.
    >
    > Sanjeev Sharma <sanjeev_sharma@mentor.com> writes:
    >> This is a patch to the rtw_cmd.c file that fixes Error reported by
    >> checkpatch.
    >>
    >> Signed-off-by: Sanjeev Sharma <Sanjeev_Sharma@mentor.com>
    >> ---
    >> drivers/staging/rtl8723au/core/rtw_cmd.c | 83
    >> +++++++++++++++-----------------
    >> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
    >>
    >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/core/rtw_cmd.c
    >> b/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/core/rtw_cmd.c
    >> index 4eaa502..c1f6254 100644
    >> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/core/rtw_cmd.c
    >> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/core/rtw_cmd.c
    >> @@ -957,7 +957,7 @@ static void traffic_status_watchdog(struct rtw_adapter *padapter)
    >> /* check traffic for powersaving. */
    >> if (((pmlmepriv->LinkDetectInfo.NumRxUnicastOkInPeriod +
    >> pmlmepriv->LinkDetectInfo.NumTxOkInPeriod) > 8) ||
    >> - pmlmepriv->LinkDetectInfo.NumRxUnicastOkInPeriod >2)
    >> + pmlmepriv->LinkDetectInfo.NumRxUnicastOkInPeriod > 2)
    >> bEnterPS = false;
    >> else
    >> bEnterPS = true;
    >
    > This makes the line longer than 80 characters, that is worse than the 'problem' you are fixing.
    >
    > Jes
    >
    > Hello jes,
    >
    > How it can be worse because checkpatch treating this as an Error and
    > line longer than 80 character is warning reported by checkpatch and I
    > could see that in entire staging directory,
    > every maintainer most of the time ignore the 80 column limit and give
    > priority to Error.
    >
    > Please let me know your comment .
    >
    > Sanjeev Sharma

    checkpatch has it's ideas, doesn't mean it's blindly right at all
    times. In this particular case it keeps the code more readable to keep
    it below 80 characters than it does to add those two blanks and make the
    line longer.

    I agree the long variable names are nasty, and it doesn't help they were
    done in StUdLyCaPs. If you want to attack it from that front, please go
    ahead.

    However, on formatting, please respond with proper email using proper
    quoting when replying.

    Thanks,
    Jes


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2014-10-30 16:01    [W:5.901 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site