Re: [PATCH] i2c-algo-pca: fix all coding style issues in i2c-algo-pca.c

[Farid Hammane <farid.hammane-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

Hi Jean and Wolfram,

On Thursday 22 April 2010 09:59:37 you wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 09:25:24AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 01:57:38 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > Hi Farid,
> > >
> > > thanks for this approach. Have you checked that the binary is the same
> > > before/after your patch? If so, please mention in your patch
> > > description.

Ok, I think that nothing can be broken with this kind of patch. I just built 
i2c-algo-pca.c and everything was ok.

For further patchs I will mention that it has been tested. Thanks for the 
advice !

> > >
> > > Also, always keep in mind that checkpatch helps to make code readable.
> > > Some of your changes should keep readability in mind not just fixing
> > > the warnings.

Ok

> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 09:11:37PM +0200, Farid Hammane wrote:
> > > > This patch fixes all coding style issues found by checkpatch.pl.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Farid Hammane <farid.hammane-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/i2c/algos/i2c-algo-pca.c |   74
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 files changed, 44
> > > > insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/algos/i2c-algo-pca.c
> > > > b/drivers/i2c/algos/i2c-algo-pca.c (...)
> > > > @@ -178,12 +178,12 @@ static int pca_rx_ack(struct i2c_algo_pca_data
> > > > *adap, }
> > > >
> > > >  static int pca_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *i2c_adap,
> > > > -                    struct i2c_msg *msgs,
> > > > -                    int num)
> > > > +		struct i2c_msg *msgs,
> > > > +		int num)
> > >
> > > One more tab maybe?
> >
> > Better use tab + spaces and align on the opening parenthesis. What
> > checkpatch.pl complains about here isn't the alignment, it's the use of
> > more than 8 consecutive spaces.

Ok

> 
> OK
> 
> > > > (...)
> > > > @@ -241,8 +244,10 @@ static int pca_xfer(struct i2c_adapter
> > > > *i2c_adap, completed = pca_address(adap, msg);
> > > >  			break;
> > > >
> > > > -		case 0x18: /* SLA+W has been transmitted; ACK has been received 
*/
> > > > -		case 0x28: /* Data byte in I2CDAT has been transmitted; ACK has
> > > > been received */ +		case 0x18: /* SLA+W has been transmitted;
> > > > +			      ACK has been received */
> > > > +		case 0x28: /* Data byte in I2CDAT has been transmitted;
> > > > +			      ACK has been received */
> > >
> > > First, check CodingStyle for how multiline comments should look like.

Done ;)

> > > For readability, I'd like to keep them single line, though. I think
> > > this could be done by rewording. Same for all following comments.
> >
> > Please keep in mind that Farid doesn't know the code. He is "only"
> > helping with formatting cleanups. Asking him to reword the comments
> 
> I think s/has been//g will help already. And getting accoustomed to the
>  code you are modifying is not that bad ;)
> 
> > doesn't seem wise. And there's nothing wrong with two-line comments as
> > above. The "preferred comment format" in CodingStyle is often
> > unrealistic IMHO, I'm not always following it in my own code.
> 
> I disagree here. I'd rather break the 80 columns limit than having
>  multiline comments not really standing out.
> 
> Also, I feel a bit uneasy as changing the comments spoils the history for
> git-blame in case you want to know when/if the state-machine was changed.
>  Then again, I like properly formatted code.

To keep readability, I broke every line after the semicolon.
I understand both your points of view and I prefer not to change these lines.

> 
> Summa summarum, just send V2, it's not really worth fighting over it :)

Patch V2 will come with the next email.

Thanks,
I'll keep in mind your advices.

Regards,

Farid

> 
> Regards,
> 
>    Wolfram
>