From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752734AbbCHVqy (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:46:54 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0228.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.228]:59388 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751894AbbCHVqw (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:46:52 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1538:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2559:2562:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3350:3622:3865:3870:3874:4321:5007:6261:10004:10400:10848:11026:11232:11658:11914:12296:12517:12519:12740:13069:13311:13357:21080,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: brain71_1e9f8c0037d4f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1411 Message-ID: <1425851209.2745.1.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] driver core: fix several coding style warnings From: Joe Perches To: Ioana Antoche Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2015 14:46:49 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1425850095-4596-1-git-send-email-ioana.antoche@gmail.com> References: <1425850095-4596-1-git-send-email-ioana.antoche@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.10-0ubuntu1~14.10.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2015-03-08 at 23:28 +0200, Ioana Antoche wrote: > Fix checkpatch.pl warnings such as: > * missing blank line after declarations > * line over 80 characters [] > diff --git a/drivers/base/bus.c b/drivers/base/bus.c [] > @@ -298,8 +299,7 @@ static struct device *next_device(struct klist_iter *i) > * count in the supplied callback. > */ > int bus_for_each_dev(struct bus_type *bus, struct device *start, > - void *data, int (*fn)(struct device *, void *)) > -{ > + void *data, int (*fn)(struct device *, void *)) { That's a checkpatch defect.