Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1351173 > unrolled thread

[PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported by checkpatch

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported by checkpatch Saiyam Doshi <saiyamdoshi.in@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 20:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported  by checkpatch Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-03-07 02:30 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported  by checkpatch Saiyam Doshi <saiyamdoshi.in@gmail.com> - 2016-03-08 21:30 +0100
        Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported  by checkpatch Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-03-11 23:00 +0100

#1351173 — [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported by checkpatch

List of modified files with comment,
lowmemorykiller.c: Added blank line after array declaration
sync.h: Added comment for spinlock_t definition,
        Fixed parentheses alignment in function declaration
sync_debug.c: Removed unnecessary braces for single statement block
timed_gpio.c: Added comment for spinlock_t definition

Signed-off-by: Saiyam Doshi <saiyamdoshi.in@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c |  2 ++
 drivers/staging/android/sync.h            | 10 ++--------
 drivers/staging/android/sync_debug.c      |  3 +--
 drivers/staging/android/timed_gpio.c      |  1 +
 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c b/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c
index 8b5a4a8..256b257 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c
@@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ static short lowmem_adj[6] = {
 	6,
 	12,
 };
+
 static int lowmem_adj_size = 4;
 static int lowmem_minfree[6] = {
 	3 * 512,	/* 6MB */
@@ -57,6 +58,7 @@ static int lowmem_minfree[6] = {
 	4 * 1024,	/* 16MB */
 	16 * 1024,	/* 64MB */
 };
+
 static int lowmem_minfree_size = 4;
 
 static unsigned long lowmem_deathpending_timeout;
diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/sync.h b/drivers/staging/android/sync.h
index afa0752..c55204b 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/android/sync.h
+++ b/drivers/staging/android/sync.h
@@ -93,16 +93,13 @@ struct sync_timeline {
 	struct kref		kref;
 	const struct sync_timeline_ops	*ops;
 	char			name[32];
-
 	/* protected by child_list_lock */
 	bool			destroyed;
 	int			context, value;
-
 	struct list_head	child_list_head;
+	/* lock to protect child_list_head */
 	spinlock_t		child_list_lock;
-
 	struct list_head	active_list_head;
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
 	struct list_head	sync_timeline_list;
 #endif
@@ -122,7 +119,6 @@ struct sync_timeline {
  */
 struct sync_pt {
 	struct fence base;
-
 	struct list_head	child_list;
 	struct list_head	active_list;
 };
@@ -159,10 +155,8 @@ struct sync_fence {
 	struct list_head	sync_fence_list;
 #endif
 	int num_fences;
-
 	wait_queue_head_t	wq;
 	atomic_t		status;
-
 	struct sync_fence_cb	cbs[];
 };
 
@@ -361,6 +355,6 @@ void sync_dump(void);
 # define sync_dump()
 #endif
 int sync_fence_wake_up_wq(wait_queue_t *curr, unsigned mode,
-				 int wake_flags, void *key);
+			  int wake_flags, void *key);
 
 #endif /* _LINUX_SYNC_H */
diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/sync_debug.c b/drivers/staging/android/sync_debug.c
index f45d13c..02a1649 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/android/sync_debug.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/android/sync_debug.c
@@ -158,9 +158,8 @@ static void sync_print_fence(struct seq_file *s, struct sync_fence *fence)
 	seq_printf(s, "[%p] %s: %s\n", fence, fence->name,
 		   sync_status_str(atomic_read(&fence->status)));
 
-	for (i = 0; i < fence->num_fences; ++i) {
+	for (i = 0; i < fence->num_fences; ++i)
 		sync_print_pt(s, fence->cbs[i].sync_pt, true);
-	}
 
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&fence->wq.lock, flags);
 	list_for_each_entry(pos, &fence->wq.task_list, task_list) {
diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/timed_gpio.c b/drivers/staging/android/timed_gpio.c
index bcd9924..cede99a 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/android/timed_gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/android/timed_gpio.c
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
 struct timed_gpio_data {
 	struct timed_output_dev dev;
 	struct hrtimer timer;
+	/* lock protects gpio access while setting it's value */
 	spinlock_t lock;
 	unsigned gpio;
 	int max_timeout;
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1351240 — Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported by checkpatch

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 01:00:33AM +0530, Saiyam Doshi wrote:
> List of modified files with comment,
> lowmemorykiller.c: Added blank line after array declaration
> sync.h: Added comment for spinlock_t definition,
>         Fixed parentheses alignment in function declaration
> sync_debug.c: Removed unnecessary braces for single statement block
> timed_gpio.c: Added comment for spinlock_t definition

You need to do only one thing per patch, please split this up into
multiple patches.

Also verify that these are all really needed, please always work against
linux-next, not Linus's kernel tree.

thanks,

greg k-h

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1353382 — Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported by checkpatch

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 05:21:08PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> You need to do only one thing per patch, please split this up into
> multiple patches.

Created two separate patches out of it having same logical change in each.

> Also verify that these are all really needed, please always work against
> linux-next, not Linus's kernel tree.

In 'drivers/staging/android/TODO' checkpatch.pl cleanup mentioned.
Also this patches are created from latest linux-next tree. How you get 
information about target kernel version for submitted patch? I mean in patch
there is no information about kernel version from which the patch is created.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1356212 — Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: Fixed coding style issues reported by checkpatch

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 01:55:01AM +0530, Saiyam Doshi wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 05:21:08PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > You need to do only one thing per patch, please split this up into
> > multiple patches.
> 
> Created two separate patches out of it having same logical change in each.

You have to send these as two different emails, I can't do anything with
patches as attachments, sorry.

thanks,

greg k-h

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web