[lm-sensors] next 17 checkpatch patches

[lm-sensors] next 17 checkpatch patches

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1129 bytes --]

Hi all,

I've examined some more files for checkpatch problems.
After this I'll post 17 patches.
checkpatch lists no problems with them
They are all compile tested

Within the files I address some problems are not resolved:

There were a few places where lines were a few chars too long but were not
easy to break
(e.g. because it was a long URL).

There was one place where a macro needed a do while(0); didn't peek at that
one yet

And on a place there were two assignments in an if. Previously on a
different case Jean told me
it was intentional, therefore I did not touch it
(I did touch a few places where there was a single assignment within an if).

I might be doing a few more of these later today or next few days.
There are still about 50 files with errors or warning left. However, I have
kinda picked the low hanging fruit (= the files that only have a few
errors).

Best regards, Frans

PS: I did not bother to report the details of the checkpatch errors that
were fixed in the commit message.
For some of the files that still are to be done that would result in commit
messages of > 100 lines (and not too useful).

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1230 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 153 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] next 17 checkpatch patches

[Guenter Roeck]

Hi Frans,

On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 11:23:29AM -0500, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I've examined some more files for checkpatch problems.
> After this I'll post 17 patches.
> checkpatch lists no problems with them
> They are all compile tested
> 
> Within the files I address some problems are not resolved:
> 
> There were a few places where lines were a few chars too long but were not easy
> to break
> (e.g. because it was a long URL).
> 
> There was one place where a macro needed a do while(0); didn't peek at that one
> yet
> 
> And on a place there were two assignments in an if. Previously on a different
> case Jean told me
> it was intentional, therefore I did not touch it
> (I did touch a few places where there was a single assignment within an if).
> 
> I might be doing a few more of these later today or next few days.
> There are still about 50 files with errors or warning left. However, I have
> kinda picked the low hanging fruit (= the files that only have a few errors).
> 
> Best regards, Frans
> 
> PS: I did not bother to report the details of the checkpatch errors that were
> fixed in the commit message.

Would be great if you could do that, though. Not in the headline, but in the text.
Otherwise, I or Jean would have to do it, for which we don't necessarily have the time.

> For some of the files that still are to be done that would result in commit
> messages of > 100 lines (and not too useful).

That is why you do it in the explanation, not in the headline ...

Another nitpick: We commonly use

hwmon: (drivername) This is a commit message

as commit headline. Not much difference, but it would save us a couple of minutes
if you could do that as well.

Patches look good, except for the last one for which I sent you separate feedback.
Would be great if you could resubmit the series with the above changes.

Thanks,
Guenter

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] next 17 checkpatch patches

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2201 bytes --]

2012/1/8 Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@ericsson.com>

> Hi Frans,
>
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 11:23:29AM -0500, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've examined some more files for checkpatch problems.
> > After this I'll post 17 patches.
> > checkpatch lists no problems with them
> > They are all compile tested
> >
> > Within the files I address some problems are not resolved:
> >
> > There were a few places where lines were a few chars too long but were
> not easy
> > to break
> > (e.g. because it was a long URL).
> >
> > There was one place where a macro needed a do while(0); didn't peek at
> that one
> > yet
> >
> > And on a place there were two assignments in an if. Previously on a
> different
> > case Jean told me
> > it was intentional, therefore I did not touch it
> > (I did touch a few places where there was a single assignment within an
> if).
> >
> > I might be doing a few more of these later today or next few days.
> > There are still about 50 files with errors or warning left. However, I
> have
> > kinda picked the low hanging fruit (= the files that only have a few
> errors).
> >
> > Best regards, Frans
> >
> > PS: I did not bother to report the details of the checkpatch errors that
> were
> > fixed in the commit message.
>
> Would be great if you could do that, though. Not in the headline, but in
> the text.
> Otherwise, I or Jean would have to do it, for which we don't necessarily
> have the time.
>
> > For some of the files that still are to be done that would result in
> commit
> > messages of > 100 lines (and not too useful).
>
> That is why you do it in the explanation, not in the headline ...
>
> Another nitpick: We commonly use
>
> hwmon: (drivername) This is a commit message
>
> as commit headline. Not much difference, but it would save us a couple of
> minutes
> if you could do that as well.
>
> Patches look good, except for the last one for which I sent you separate
> feedback.
> Would be great if you could resubmit the series with the above changes.
>
> Thanks,
> Guenter
>

Will fix, thanks for the quick reply.
It'll take an hour or so, I need to revert all paches and regenerate the
checkpatch output (I already nuked that one)

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2749 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 153 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

Re: [lm-sensors] next 17 checkpatch patches

[Guenter Roeck]

Hi Frans,

On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 01:15:22PM -0500, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 
[ ... ]
> 
> Will fix, thanks for the quick reply.
> It'll take an hour or so, I need to revert all paches and regenerate the
> checkpatch output (I already nuked that one)

If you use git, "git rebase -i <baseline>" is your friend here. It gives you the list of patches
to apply in your editor. Tag every patch with "r", and you'll get the opportunity to edit
each commit message. Tag a patch with "e", and you can amend before continuing the rebase.

Guenter

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors