From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-GM-THRID: 6666918096348905472 X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f089:: with SMTP id go9mr9754867plb.111.1552273659560; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 20:07:39 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a63:246:: with SMTP id 67ls5490329pgc.11.gmail; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 20:07:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzPWaJtXRFtdKdbihSijw7CDk+goVjarKwd7s4ofy/MQP+KFa96ozbJqNcw8YSJnDJo2k5A X-Received: by 2002:a65:6104:: with SMTP id z4mr5913179pgu.8.1552273658718; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 20:07:38 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1552273658; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=h7SXIWQfzi54Tt0n8EEe/S+dtyCeJ13ryf3x5wonVWzXWeuQjL8djZNvA1n6K0F/QJ pW9ou505RC4SD4cFuZ6LLxln7XFPOa2oM4IVxXSGRhkjigKv72pr4ecd9A/UrTLpgtjy YRgzNXUclBXYdfHN2uOy/p4GUGfMf1sT2TFAbfKIV8kbSQ+2p8HAcpca2uYhH61Wbgh3 soZOAsHuXFwxoT47heFnMYp3r8hbpT6g3sez/Wf8YCLEf8bdnPhQNHyKl7vNxLg3DD3P F5SiPRpmZavaThWErtOZZ8RWKnkbBXq3RZt964QvIS2LHQ8oW/AaCO8qg23U3uEb2+07 oYJQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=RmASwtenpfzP19pN/Xbj2nUU1EUJkFKY36QDM/Ve43E=; b=UTrx+2VOrGH0IgwqD82GoDKA5PM6Z4oTYK5nN2+jMUzndyD8XE0EunO27g9euegfL9 ACYTlS1EC7eUUE1py3i1G/FnUCpBu4miw7a+GVRfaQMNROWaRvpVn42GATKf7Um7hdpR r82MaKkeYYfFIqg628pi2K0xi8KfDNz8RoSyz8VxAk8BLT9HBmucvBF5/UbsvdjSXVel GaaQGatNFwWsc2JEwajzZFj8rH8h2hPRbBNgkOTMNoLn/MDXHvxUb6tGj3xCt8kvCYQv /UyIai3au090BWbM6atZyHESTiBc1Wv292YoqVBuA8qxAYorJdaw7a1MG+pVXpxFNbwL ulOQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=JGsGS5Ds; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gregkh@linuxfoundation.org designates 198.145.29.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org. [198.145.29.99]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e71si190348pfc.1.2019.03.10.20.07.38 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 10 Mar 2019 20:07:38 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gregkh@linuxfoundation.org designates 198.145.29.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=198.145.29.99; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=JGsGS5Ds; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gregkh@linuxfoundation.org designates 198.145.29.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Received: from localhost (unknown [12.27.65.221]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 617AB206DF; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 03:07:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1552273658; bh=U4jhAYG4H9SiQXBOZ8uBTxYEBeZsMi18aBMvzS48sR4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=JGsGS5DsFnrCTIED9Z4ArhvOE+YQJjvTjlYVYoz/pSwWQ2+QIuJh5MjddC/tndBTl L5LFc+hDyEBDXhJIB4QfHuqxMOVxpsE9jyoVUHh6YQctfKakuncKBxiushNfkWGf7L nnGAg8/hbVWofzfHpGMf1dev+TLtBDpyLQm9UVNQ= Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 04:07:37 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Jules Irenge Cc: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] staging: rtl8192e: fix line over 80 characters warning Message-ID: <20190311030737.GB17063@kroah.com> References: <20190311000702.12740-1-jbi.octave@gmail.com> <20190311000702.12740-4-jbi.octave@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190311000702.12740-4-jbi.octave@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:07:02AM +0000, Jules Irenge wrote: > Replace dot11d_info with dt1d_inf to fix checkpatch.pl warning > Issue found by checkpatch.pl: > "WARNING: line over 80 characters" > > Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge > --- > drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c | 48 +++++++++++++++---------------- > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c > index 721892cef3a7..17738859b197 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/dot11d.c > @@ -37,14 +37,14 @@ static struct channel_list channel_array[] = { > > void dot11d_init(struct rtllib_device *ieee) > { > - struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee); > + struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee); No, the original variable name is fine, don't shorten things for no good reason. > > - dot11d_info->enabled = false; > + dt1d_inf->enabled = false; > > - dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE; > - dot11d_info->country_len = 0; > - memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > - memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > + dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE; > + dt1d_inf->country_len = 0; > + memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > + memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > RESET_CIE_WATCHDOG(ieee); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(dot11d_init); None of those lines were over 80 characters, so why did you change anything here? > @@ -93,29 +93,29 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dot11d_channel_map); > > void dot11d_reset(struct rtllib_device *ieee) > { > - struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee); > + struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(ieee); > u32 i; > > - memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > - memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > + memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > + memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > for (i = 1; i <= 11; i++) > - (dot11d_info->channel_map)[i] = 1; > + (dt1d_inf->channel_map)[i] = 1; > for (i = 12; i <= 14; i++) > - (dot11d_info->channel_map)[i] = 2; > - dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE; > - dot11d_info->country_len = 0; > + (dt1d_inf->channel_map)[i] = 2; > + dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_NONE; > + dt1d_inf->country_len = 0; > RESET_CIE_WATCHDOG(ieee); > } Same with this function, what is wrong with it as-is? > > void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address, > u16 country_len, u8 *country) > { > - struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev); > + struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev); > u8 i, j, number_of_triples, max_channel_number; > struct chnl_txpow_triple *triple; > > - memset(dot11d_info->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > - memset(dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > + memset(dt1d_inf->channel_map, 0, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > + memset(dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list, 0xFF, MAX_CHANNEL_NUMBER + 1); > max_channel_number = 0; > number_of_triples = (country_len - 3) / 3; > triple = (struct chnl_txpow_triple *)(country + 3); Same here. > @@ -135,8 +135,8 @@ void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address, > } > > for (j = 0; j < triple->num_channels; j++) { > - dot11d_info->channel_map[triple->first_channel + j] = 1; > - dot11d_info->max_tx_power_list[triple->first_channel + j] = > + dt1d_inf->channel_map[triple->first_channel + j] = 1; > + dt1d_inf->max_tx_power_list[triple->first_channel + j] = > triple->max_tx_power; > max_channel_number = triple->first_channel + j; > } Ok, that one line is "too long", but really, it is fine as-is, no need to change it. > @@ -146,18 +146,18 @@ void dot11d_update_country(struct rtllib_device *dev, u8 *address, > > UPDATE_CIE_SRC(dev, address); > > - dot11d_info->country_len = country_len; > - memcpy(dot11d_info->country_buffer, country, country_len); > - dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED; > + dt1d_inf->country_len = country_len; > + memcpy(dt1d_inf->country_buffer, country, country_len); > + dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED; > } > > void dot11d_scan_complete(struct rtllib_device *dev) > { > - struct rt_dot11d_info *dot11d_info = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev); > + struct rt_dot11d_info *dt1d_inf = GET_DOT11D_INFO(dev); > > - switch (dot11d_info->state) { > + switch (dt1d_inf->state) { > case DOT11D_STATE_LEARNED: > - dot11d_info->state = DOT11D_STATE_DONE; > + dt1d_inf->state = DOT11D_STATE_DONE; > break; > case DOT11D_STATE_DONE: > dot11d_reset(dev); Why change these lines? As was said before, checkpatch is a hint, not a hard rule. You always need to think when making changes. thanks, greg k-h