From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFE6372615; Tue, 15 Jul 2025 08:05:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752566733; cv=none; b=LzVL4BkNIzFPFpXESXZaSxa0JuiTx1ikI1GuZRFzmV1LG5d/XA58Pm2OCj8Moo1Xu5pngagJWUSUNQJKPmlm9Y9xAt8lemVXnhx9kT0TdyXVd3uCyn/0aoakn2VxSytBvLDcu1DFNgjPpXJ9ckZTc4QfC+2fWY3nDc/IKbOEPQk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752566733; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KuLjHZFy6jp55nnqajTexY8+wReRQgnYu1xerCHVT3E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=BdZEsSgdbhFeZTONG7wIz3MVpxKB8bTr57Rx/yZKIwzENCvxFUg/u6mwjsI/cltM1sRjmccoKnrLM7RqNIx20XYXl2Wi95rfkQgEJNaHQvfmHHEA0rCXGWDr4ZjH+UM0yUpYF2g4botePIQYQR1Smv17QrZl/1rUst/UOjt5qCA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=AT1dOuif; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="AT1dOuif" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD68EC4CEE3; Tue, 15 Jul 2025 08:05:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1752566733; bh=KuLjHZFy6jp55nnqajTexY8+wReRQgnYu1xerCHVT3E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=AT1dOuifk4hg+z8o7oX3gqmo0arWBWuUb4bAYCNSsO2LF+A508K6Kpo5r99YW7fX4 8d3BX4yqrJoGXEu+o+Nc5605ZnvlbVih6l0M7vrDejBtBL4363s5FoXAj1HNEZxdid mQ7zVLUmtVg1wrLgytcZZE+5xLThoJ191ojcck9o= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 10:05:30 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Rui Miguel Silva Cc: Akhil Varkey , greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johan@kernel.org, elder@kernel.org, ~lkcamp/patches@lists.sr.ht, koike@igalia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: power_supply fix alignment Message-ID: <2025071540-sepia-amuck-c757@gregkh> References: <20250714135606.41671-1-akhilvarkey@disroot.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 05:38:31PM +0100, Rui Miguel Silva wrote: > Hey Akhil, > Thanks for your patch. > > All looks good with the exception of a small nit... > > On Mon Jul 14, 2025 at 2:56 PM WEST, Akhil Varkey wrote: > > > Fix checkpatch check "CHECK:Alignment should match open parenthesis" > > > > Signed-off-by: Akhil Varkey > > --- > > > > Hello, This is my first patch, I appreciate any feedbacks. Thanks!! > > Welcome, and continue... > > > --- > > drivers/staging/greybus/power_supply.c | 14 +++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/power_supply.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/power_supply.c > > index 2ef46822f676..a484c0ca058d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/power_supply.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/power_supply.c > > @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static struct gb_power_supply_prop *get_psy_prop(struct gb_power_supply *gbpsy, > > } > > > > static int is_psy_prop_writeable(struct gb_power_supply *gbpsy, > > - enum power_supply_property psp) > > + enum power_supply_property psp) > > { > > struct gb_power_supply_prop *prop; > > > > @@ -493,7 +493,7 @@ static int gb_power_supply_description_get(struct gb_power_supply *gbpsy) > > if (!gbpsy->model_name) > > return -ENOMEM; > > gbpsy->serial_number = kstrndup(resp.serial_number, PROP_MAX, > > - GFP_KERNEL); > > + GFP_KERNEL); > > if (!gbpsy->serial_number) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > @@ -546,7 +546,7 @@ static int gb_power_supply_prop_descriptors_get(struct gb_power_supply *gbpsy) > > } > > > > gbpsy->props = kcalloc(gbpsy->properties_count, sizeof(*gbpsy->props), > > - GFP_KERNEL); > > + GFP_KERNEL); > > if (!gbpsy->props) { > > ret = -ENOMEM; > > goto out_put_operation; > > @@ -634,8 +634,8 @@ static int __gb_power_supply_property_get(struct gb_power_supply *gbpsy, > > } > > > > static int __gb_power_supply_property_strval_get(struct gb_power_supply *gbpsy, > > - enum power_supply_property psp, > > - union power_supply_propval *val) > > + enum power_supply_property psp, > > + union power_supply_propval *val) > > Here you fix the alignment, but the last line goes over column 81, even > though 80 is not really one hard requirement anymore, all code > (strings is ok to go over to be easier to grep for messages) is on that > register. > > So, to be coherent, if you could please send a V2 without this specific change > would be great, Or even better, if you could get rid of all the _ and __ > prefixes in functions names that would be great, and will give more > space for function paramethers. > Your call. Nah, this is fine as-is, we can go over the limit to 100 for tiny stuff like this. And the __ prefixes should be there to show no locking, or "internal" functions, right? So changing the name needs to happen very carefully. thanks, greg k-h