From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail2.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.173]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WsEjL-0001AA-G2 for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 17:12:03 +0000 Message-ID: <538F533A.3050808@candelatech.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 10:11:22 -0700 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] ath10k: provide firmware crash info via debugfs. References: <1401812719-25061-1-git-send-email-greearb@candelatech.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Michal Kazior Cc: linux-wireless , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" On 06/04/2014 02:04 AM, Michal Kazior wrote: >> + if (dbufp == dbg_hdr.dbuf) { >> + /* It is a circular buffer it seems, bail if next >> + * is head >> + */ > > Hmm, we seem to be mixing comment styles in ath10k now I guess (this > applies to other instances of multi-line comments in your patch). What > multi-line comment style should we really be using in ath10k? Kalle? Check-patch bitches if you do it differently than what is above, so I say we keep it as I have it. Not worth cleaning up other comments to match unless someone actually cares enough to do it... Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k