From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 19:58:46 -0200 From: "Gustavo F. Padovan" To: Andrei Emeltchenko , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Bluetooth: Add initial Bluetooth Management interface callbacks Message-ID: <20101124215846.GD2592@vigoh> References: <1290609575-28435-1-git-send-email-johan.hedberg@gmail.com> <1290609575-28435-3-git-send-email-johan.hedberg@gmail.com> <20101124214747.GA8626@jh-x301> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 In-Reply-To: <20101124214747.GA8626@jh-x301> Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: * Johan Hedberg [2010-11-24 23:47:47 +0200]: > Hi Andrei, > > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010, Andrei Emeltchenko wrote: > > > -       if (haddr->hci_dev != HCI_DEV_NONE) { > > > -               if (!(hdev = hci_dev_get(haddr->hci_dev))) { > > > +       if (haddr.hci_dev != HCI_DEV_NONE) { > > > +               if (!(hdev = hci_dev_get(haddr.hci_dev))) { > > > > doesn't checkpatch give errors here? > > Probably, but I've understood that it's ok if it's the existing code > that contains the coding style issue. > > > Would be more clean like: > > ... > > hdev = hci_dev_get(haddr.hci_dev); > > if (!hdev) > > ... > > > > At some point shall be fixed in the old code also > > Agreed. A separate code cleanup patch would be nice. I've intentionally > kept the old style to not mix coding style and functional changes into > the same patch and to make it clear that I'm not introducing any changes > to the code logic at this place. Yes, that should be a separated patch. Johan, your patches are fine, but I have to wait the wireless-next-2.6 be synced with the net-next-2.6 tree. Then I'll able to apply it. -- Gustavo F. Padovan http://profusion.mobi