From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1XFi75-0005ED-Vs for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 11:13:36 +0000 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: fix wmi service bitmap debug References: <1406628239-31322-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> <87d2cbz3wy.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 14:13:10 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Michal Kazior's message of "Fri, 8 Aug 2014 12:24:48 +0200") Message-ID: <87mwbfxmih.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 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" Michal Kazior writes: >> Based on Joe's suggestion, I'm planning to change the macro like below. >> Are you ok with that? >> >> It actually adds a new checkpatch warning but I'm going to ignore that >> for now: >> >> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.h:177: ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parenthesis >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.h b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.h >> index 109ea684f88f..e70836586756 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.h >> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.h >> @@ -174,46 +174,48 @@ enum wmi_main_service { >> >> static inline char *wmi_service_name(int service_id) >> { >> -#define SVCSTR(x) { case x: return #x; } >> +#define SVCSTR(x) case x: return #x >> + > [...] > > This was the checkpatch warning I originally fixed by using { .. } :-) Hehe, I was actually thinking maybe that's why you added the braces :) > Anyway, I don't see a problem with the macro change you suggest. > Apparently we're doomed to have a checkpatch warning either way unless > we don't use a macro at all. Yeah. And it's not like that we need to have 0 checkpatch warnings. For example, I already have a long list of errors I ignore: MSLEEP,USLEEP_RANGE,PRINTK_WITHOUT_KERN_LEVEL,NETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE,LINUX_VERSION_CODE,COMPLEX_MACRO checkpatch just a good tool to catch some of the style issues and makes my work easier, especially when newbies send patches. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k