Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] staging: vt6655: rearrange lines exceeding 100 columns

[Deepak R Varma <mh12gx2825@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 06:01:39PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2020, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> 
> > Rearrange lines that are longer than 100 columns width. Issue reported
> > by chckpatch script.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Deepak R Varma <mh12gx2825@gmail.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> >  drivers/staging/vt6655/device_main.c | 8 ++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/device_main.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/device_main.c
> > index 09ab6d6f2429..4fc90b111f9d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/device_main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/device_main.c
> > @@ -461,7 +461,10 @@ static bool device_init_rings(struct vnt_private *priv)
> >  		priv->opts.rx_descs0 * sizeof(struct vnt_rx_desc);
> >
> >  	priv->tx0_bufs = dma_alloc_coherent(&priv->pcid->dev,
> > -					    priv->opts.tx_descs[0] * PKT_BUF_SZ + priv->opts.tx_descs[1] * PKT_BUF_SZ + CB_BEACON_BUF_SIZE + CB_MAX_BUF_SIZE,
> > +					    priv->opts.tx_descs[0] * PKT_BUF_SZ +
> > +					    priv->opts.tx_descs[1] * PKT_BUF_SZ +
> > +					    CB_BEACON_BUF_SIZE +
> > +					    CB_MAX_BUF_SIZE,
> >  					    &priv->tx_bufs_dma0, GFP_ATOMIC);
> >  	if (!priv->tx0_bufs) {
> >  		dev_err(&priv->pcid->dev, "allocate buf dma memory failed\n");
> > @@ -1077,7 +1080,8 @@ static void vnt_interrupt_process(struct vnt_private *priv)
> >  			    priv->op_mode == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) &&
> >  			    priv->vif->bss_conf.enable_beacon) {
> >  				MACvOneShotTimer1MicroSec(priv,
> > -							  (priv->vif->bss_conf.beacon_int - MAKE_BEACON_RESERVED) << 10);
> > +							  (priv->vif->bss_conf.beacon_int -
> > +							   MAKE_BEACON_RESERVED) << 10);
> 
> Maybe it would make more sense to shorten the function name?
> 
Thank you Julia.
I do not think that will work. Even without the function name,
the line would still cross 100 columns if you try to fit it on a single
line. Also, shortening the function name would make it looks different
from rest of similar named functions.
Please suggest how would you do it?

> Also the {} are not needed.
> 
Agree if we can get the instruction on a single line. Else, I think it
is better to keep the {} to make it more readable.

Thank you.
Deepak.

> julia
> 
> 
> >  			}
> >
> >  			/* TODO: adhoc PS mode */
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "outreachy-kernel" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20201014154121.GA23584%40ubuntu204.
> >