Re: [PATCH 01/14] cw1200: v4: low-level hardware I/O functions

[Solomon Peachy <pizza@shaftnet.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1163 bytes --]

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:01:35AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> No.  It's just a guideline.  As far as I'm concerned,
> ignore every checkpatch message you don't agree with.

Okay, glad to hear that.  (there are still several hundred that should 
be fixed, but mass renaming variables is a bit of a PITA..)

> Just be aware that there's a tool to help you get your
> code looking more like what most others generally consider
> "kernel style".

Yeah, I've known about checkpatch; but when it generates the better part of
800 complaints, sometimes finding the ones that matter is a little difficult.

> Though when you add "new" code, stuff like
> 
> 	> +     u32 sdio_reg_addr_17bit ;
> 
> is untidy because of the space before the semicolon.

No argument from here.

FWIW, while I've worked quite a bit of this codebase, there are still 
large swaths of this driver I haven't given more than a cursory glance 
because they haven't needed debugging.

 - Solomon
-- 
Solomon Peachy        		       pizza at shaftnet dot org	 
Melbourne, FL                          ^^ (mail/jabber/gtalk) ^^
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]