From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965463AbbJ1JQY (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 05:16:24 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.220.52]:33502 "EHLO mail-pa0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932124AbbJ1JMQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 05:12:16 -0400 From: Sudip Mukherjee To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v2 04/11] parport: fix coding style Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:41:33 +0530 Message-Id: <1446023500-21292-5-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.9.1 In-Reply-To: <1446023500-21292-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> References: <1446023500-21292-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org The multi-line comments were not according to the kernel coding style. Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee --- drivers/parport/share.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/parport/share.c b/drivers/parport/share.c index d85e566..840c730 100644 --- a/drivers/parport/share.c +++ b/drivers/parport/share.c @@ -207,8 +207,10 @@ static void detach_driver_chain(struct parport *port) /* Ask kmod for some lowlevel drivers. */ static void get_lowlevel_driver (void) { - /* There is no actual module called this: you should set - * up an alias for modutils. */ + /* + * There is no actual module called this: you should set + * up an alias for modutils. + */ request_module ("parport_lowlevel"); } @@ -728,11 +730,12 @@ parport_register_device(struct parport *port, const char *name, } } - /* We up our own module reference count, and that of the port - on which a device is to be registered, to ensure that - neither of us gets unloaded while we sleep in (e.g.) - kmalloc. - */ + /* + * We up our own module reference count, and that of the port + * on which a device is to be registered, to ensure that + * neither of us gets unloaded while we sleep in (e.g.) + * kmalloc. + */ if (!try_module_get(port->ops->owner)) { return NULL; } @@ -783,9 +786,11 @@ parport_register_device(struct parport *port, const char *name, } tmp->next = port->physport->devices; - wmb(); /* Make sure that tmp->next is written before it's - added to the list; see comments marked 'no locking - required' */ + wmb(); /* + * Make sure that tmp->next is written before it's + * added to the list; see comments marked 'no locking + * required' + */ if (port->physport->devices) port->physport->devices->prev = tmp; port->physport->devices = tmp; @@ -1008,8 +1013,10 @@ void parport_unregister_device(struct pardevice *dev) spin_unlock(&port->pardevice_lock); - /* Make sure we haven't left any pointers around in the wait - * list. */ + /* + * Make sure we haven't left any pointers around in the wait + * list. + */ spin_lock_irq(&port->waitlist_lock); if (dev->waitprev || dev->waitnext || port->waithead == dev) { if (dev->waitprev) @@ -1131,8 +1138,10 @@ int parport_claim(struct pardevice *dev) goto blocked; if (port->cad != oldcad) { - /* I think we'll actually deadlock rather than - get here, but just in case.. */ + /* + * I think we'll actually deadlock rather than + * get here, but just in case.. + */ printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: %s released port when preempted!\n", port->name, oldcad->name); @@ -1185,9 +1194,11 @@ int parport_claim(struct pardevice *dev) return 0; blocked: - /* If this is the first time we tried to claim the port, register an - interest. This is only allowed for devices sleeping in - parport_claim_or_block(), or those with a wakeup function. */ + /* + * If this is the first time we tried to claim the port, register an + * interest. This is only allowed for devices sleeping in + * parport_claim_or_block(), or those with a wakeup function. + */ /* The cad_lock is still held for writing here */ if (dev->waiting & 2 || dev->wakeup) { @@ -1223,8 +1234,10 @@ int parport_claim_or_block(struct pardevice *dev) { int r; - /* Signal to parport_claim() that we can wait even without a - wakeup function. */ + /* + * Signal to parport_claim() that we can wait even without a + * wakeup function. + */ dev->waiting = 2; /* Try to claim the port. If this fails, we need to sleep. */ @@ -1242,8 +1255,10 @@ int parport_claim_or_block(struct pardevice *dev) * See also parport_release() */ - /* If dev->waiting is clear now, an interrupt - gave us the port and we would deadlock if we slept. */ + /* + * If dev->waiting is clear now, an interrupt + * gave us the port and we would deadlock if we slept. + */ if (dev->waiting) { wait_event_interruptible(dev->wait_q, !dev->waiting); @@ -1316,8 +1331,10 @@ void parport_release(struct pardevice *dev) /* Save control registers */ port->ops->save_state(port, dev->state); - /* If anybody is waiting, find out who's been there longest and - then wake them up. (Note: no locking required) */ + /* + * If anybody is waiting, find out who's been there longest and + * then wake them up. (Note: no locking required) + */ /* !!! LOCKING IS NEEDED HERE */ for (pd = port->waithead; pd; pd = pd->waitnext) { if (pd->waiting & 2) { /* sleeping in claim_or_block */ @@ -1334,8 +1351,10 @@ void parport_release(struct pardevice *dev) } } - /* Nobody was waiting, so walk the list to see if anyone is - interested in being woken up. (Note: no locking required) */ + /* + * Nobody was waiting, so walk the list to see if anyone is + * interested in being woken up. (Note: no locking required) + */ /* !!! LOCKING IS NEEDED HERE */ for (pd = port->devices; (port->cad == NULL) && pd; pd = pd->next) { if (pd->wakeup && pd != dev) -- 1.9.1