From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755062AbcBBV2k (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 2 Feb 2016 16:28:40 -0500
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:58384 "EHLO
	out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753723AbcBBV2g (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 2 Feb 2016 16:28:36 -0500
X-Sasl-enc: r+eU6vnTXrMLT/v21g/5u3QCxeLjYFe0FluEfU71oi5Q 1454448515
Message-ID: <1454448513.3898.3.camel@cvidal.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: fix coding style in rtl8188eu/core
From: Colin Vidal <colin@cvidal.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM" <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 22:28:33 +0100
In-Reply-To: <1454447665.7291.40.camel@perches.com>
References: <1454446679-17327-1-git-send-email-colin@cvidal.org>
	 <1454447665.7291.40.camel@perches.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.4 (3.18.4-1.fc23) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2016-02-02 at 13:14 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-02-02 at 21:57 +0100, Colin Vidal wrote:
> > Set constant on the left of the test, and jump a new line to avoid
> > to
> > exceed the 80 char length limit.
> []
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_iol.c
> > b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_iol.c
> []
> > @@ -22,10 +22,11 @@
> >  
> >  bool rtw_IOL_applied(struct adapter  *adapter)
> >  {
> > -	if (1 == adapter->registrypriv.fw_iol)
> > +	if (adapter->registrypriv.fw_iol == 1)
> >  		return true;
> >  
> > -	if ((2 == adapter->registrypriv.fw_iol) &&
> > (!adapter_to_dvobj(adapter)->ishighspeed))
> > +	if ((adapter->registrypriv.fw_iol == 2)
> > +	    && (!adapter_to_dvobj(adapter)->ishighspeed))
> >  		return true;
> >  	return false;
> >  }
> 
> Please review your patches with scripts/checkpatch.pl
> 
> Perhaps this is better as:
> 
> bool rtw_IOL_applied(struct adapter *adapter)
> {
> 	if (adapter->registrypriv.fw_iol == 1)
> 		return true;
> 
> 	if (adapter->registrypriv.fw_iol == 2 &&
> 	    !adapter_to_dvobj(adapter)->ishighspeed)
> 		return true;
> 
> 	return false;
> }
> 
> or maybe even
> 
> bool rtw_IOL_applied(struct adapter *adapter)
> {
> 	return adapter->registrypriv.fw_iol == 1 ||
> 	       (adapter->registrypriv.fw_iol == 2 &&
> 		!adapter_to_dvobj(adapter)->ishighspeed);
> }
> 

Oh, yeah, the second one is obviously finer. If I'm right, I should
resend a new patch with a subject which looks something like "[PATCH
v2] ... " ? 

Thanks