From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:2167 "EHLO
	wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753382Ab0C0Oam (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 27 Mar 2010 10:30:42 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] arm: msm: smd: checkpatch clean up of smd/proc_comm
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@codeaurora.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100327061430.GG18689@elf.ucw.cz>
References: <> <1269647725-4577-1-git-send-email-dwalker@codeaurora.org>
	 <20100327061430.GG18689@elf.ucw.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 07:30:29 -0700
Message-Id: <1269700229.18193.19.camel@desktop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-arm-msm.vger.kernel.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org

On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 07:14 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Fri 2010-03-26 16:55:19, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > This cleans up codeing style. There are no run time changes.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Walker <dwalker@codeaurora.org>
> 
> ACK.
> 
> > @@ -904,9 +902,9 @@ static irqreturn_t smsm_irq_handler(int irq, void *data)
> >  
> >  	if (msm_smd_debug_mask & MSM_SMSM_DEBUG)
> >  		pr_info("<SM %08x %08x>\n", apps, modm);

> > -	if (modm & SMSM_RESET) {
> > +	if (modm & SMSM_RESET)
> >  		handle_modem_crash();
> > -	}
> > +
> >  	do_smd_probe();
> >  
> >  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&smem_lock, flags);
> 
> Even through I do not think this is an improvement. Especially
> considering the if() immediately before that.

I could add a space in there, might make it more clear.

Daniel