[PATCH v4] staging: vt6655f: rxtx: code style - Fix Lines should not end with a '('

[PATCH v4] staging: vt6655f: rxtx: code style - Fix Lines should not end with a '('

[Aliya Rahmani]

Code style warnings reported by checkpatch.
Improve the layout of a function header:
*Put the first parameter immediately after the '(' and align the other
parameters underneath it.

Signed-off-by: Aliya Rahmani <aliyarahmani786@gmail.com>
---
v1->v2 changes: Put static and void on a single line.

v2->v3->v4 changes: Rework commit description.

---
 drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
index 53506e242a96..01dc83b2f4bc 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
@@ -567,19 +567,16 @@ s_uFillDataHead(
 	return buf->duration;
 }
 
-static
-void
-s_vFillRTSHead(
-	struct vnt_private *pDevice,
-	unsigned char byPktType,
-	void *pvRTS,
-	unsigned int cbFrameLength,
-	bool bNeedAck,
-	bool bDisCRC,
-	struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
-	unsigned short wCurrentRate,
-	unsigned char byFBOption
-)
+static void
+s_vFillRTSHead(struct vnt_private *pDevice,
+		unsigned char byPktType,
+		void *pvRTS,
+		unsigned int cbFrameLength,
+		bool bNeedAck,
+		bool bDisCRC,
+		struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
+		unsigned short wCurrentRate,
+		unsigned char byFBOption)
 {
 	unsigned int uRTSFrameLen = 20;
 
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH v4] staging: vt6655f: rxtx: code style - Fix Lines should not end with a '('

[Fabio M. De Francesco]

Hi Aliya,

I think that the subject of your patch can be reduced a bit. For example, 
why don't you remove that "code style -"?

On venerdì 15 aprile 2022 07:19:01 CEST Aliya Rahmani wrote:
> Code style warnings reported by checkpatch.
> Improve the layout of a function header:
> *Put the first parameter immediately after the '(' and align the other
> parameters underneath it.

You are doing two different things. Please only one logical change per 
patch. Furthermore, why that "*" before "Put"?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Aliya Rahmani <aliyarahmani786@gmail.com>
> ---
> v1->v2 changes: Put static and void on a single line.
> 
> v2->v3->v4 changes: Rework commit description.
> 
> ---
>  drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/
rxtx.c
> index 53506e242a96..01dc83b2f4bc 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> @@ -567,19 +567,16 @@ s_uFillDataHead(
>  	return buf->duration;
>  }
>  
> -static
> -void
> -s_vFillRTSHead(
> -	struct vnt_private *pDevice,
> -	unsigned char byPktType,
> -	void *pvRTS,
> -	unsigned int cbFrameLength,
> -	bool bNeedAck,
> -	bool bDisCRC,
> -	struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
> -	unsigned short wCurrentRate,
> -	unsigned char byFBOption
> -)
> +static void

Why storage class and function type are on a separate line? Is it a special 
convention for this driver?

> +s_vFillRTSHead(struct vnt_private *pDevice,
> +		unsigned char byPktType,
> +		void *pvRTS,
> +		unsigned int cbFrameLength,
> +		bool bNeedAck,
> +		bool bDisCRC,
> +		struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
> +		unsigned short wCurrentRate,
> +		unsigned char byFBOption)
>  {
>  	unsigned int uRTSFrameLen = 20;
>  
> -- 
> 2.25.1

Thanks,

Fabio M. De Francesco

Re: [PATCH v4] staging: vt6655f: rxtx: code style - Fix Lines should not end with a '('

[Julia Lawall]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2165 bytes --]



On Fri, 15 Apr 2022, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:

> Hi Aliya,
>
> I think that the subject of your patch can be reduced a bit. For example,
> why don't you remove that "code style -"?
>
> On venerdì 15 aprile 2022 07:19:01 CEST Aliya Rahmani wrote:
> > Code style warnings reported by checkpatch.
> > Improve the layout of a function header:
> > *Put the first parameter immediately after the '(' and align the other
> > parameters underneath it.
>
> You are doing two different things. Please only one logical change per
> patch. Furthermore, why that "*" before "Put"?

I think that fixing up a function header could be considered to be one
thing?

But the subject line should reflect the complete one thing.

julia

>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Aliya Rahmani <aliyarahmani786@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > v1->v2 changes: Put static and void on a single line.
> >
> > v2->v3->v4 changes: Rework commit description.
> >
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
> >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/
> rxtx.c
> > index 53506e242a96..01dc83b2f4bc 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> > @@ -567,19 +567,16 @@ s_uFillDataHead(
> >  	return buf->duration;
> >  }
> >
> > -static
> > -void
> > -s_vFillRTSHead(
> > -	struct vnt_private *pDevice,
> > -	unsigned char byPktType,
> > -	void *pvRTS,
> > -	unsigned int cbFrameLength,
> > -	bool bNeedAck,
> > -	bool bDisCRC,
> > -	struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
> > -	unsigned short wCurrentRate,
> > -	unsigned char byFBOption
> > -)
> > +static void
>
> Why storage class and function type are on a separate line? Is it a special
> convention for this driver?
>
> > +s_vFillRTSHead(struct vnt_private *pDevice,
> > +		unsigned char byPktType,
> > +		void *pvRTS,
> > +		unsigned int cbFrameLength,
> > +		bool bNeedAck,
> > +		bool bDisCRC,
> > +		struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
> > +		unsigned short wCurrentRate,
> > +		unsigned char byFBOption)
> >  {
> >  	unsigned int uRTSFrameLen = 20;
> >
> > --
> > 2.25.1
>
> Thanks,
>
> Fabio M. De Francesco
>
>
>
>

Re: [PATCH v4] staging: vt6655f: rxtx: code style - Fix Lines should not end with a '('

[Julia Lawall]

On Fri, 15 Apr 2022, Aliya Rahmani wrote:

> Code style warnings reported by checkpatch.
> Improve the layout of a function header:
> *Put the first parameter immediately after the '(' and align the other
> parameters underneath it.

The subject line should cover the whole patch, not just part of it.

Similarly, I guess checkpatch just warned about the (, not about the whole
thing.

The log message should mention about static void.

There should be no * in front of "Put".

julia


>
> Signed-off-by: Aliya Rahmani <aliyarahmani786@gmail.com>
> ---
> v1->v2 changes: Put static and void on a single line.
>
> v2->v3->v4 changes: Rework commit description.
>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> index 53506e242a96..01dc83b2f4bc 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> @@ -567,19 +567,16 @@ s_uFillDataHead(
>  	return buf->duration;
>  }
>
> -static
> -void
> -s_vFillRTSHead(
> -	struct vnt_private *pDevice,
> -	unsigned char byPktType,
> -	void *pvRTS,
> -	unsigned int cbFrameLength,
> -	bool bNeedAck,
> -	bool bDisCRC,
> -	struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
> -	unsigned short wCurrentRate,
> -	unsigned char byFBOption
> -)
> +static void
> +s_vFillRTSHead(struct vnt_private *pDevice,
> +		unsigned char byPktType,
> +		void *pvRTS,
> +		unsigned int cbFrameLength,
> +		bool bNeedAck,
> +		bool bDisCRC,
> +		struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
> +		unsigned short wCurrentRate,
> +		unsigned char byFBOption)
>  {
>  	unsigned int uRTSFrameLen = 20;
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
>
>