From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753665AbaEOGmb (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2014 02:42:31 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f52.google.com ([74.125.83.52]:61222 "EHLO mail-ee0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751605AbaEOGm3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2014 02:42:29 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 21:41:39 +0300 From: rtm To: Greg KH Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: staging: line6: Add blank lines after declarations Message-ID: <20140515184139.GA28806@gmail.com> References: <1400025402-6265-1-git-send-email-wwctrsrx@gmail.com> <20140513120201.GA32045@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140513120201.GA32045@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 02:02:01PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 02:56:42AM +0300, Artem Fetishev wrote: > > Use the more common kernel coding style. > > > > Signed-off-by: Artem Fetishev > > --- > > drivers/staging/line6/capture.c | 4 ++++ > > drivers/staging/line6/midi.c | 2 ++ > > drivers/staging/line6/playback.c | 5 +++++ > > drivers/staging/line6/pod.c | 5 +++++ > > drivers/staging/line6/toneport.c | 2 ++ > > drivers/staging/line6/variax.c | 2 ++ > > 6 files changed, 20 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/line6/capture.c b/drivers/staging/line6/capture.c > > index 0eda51d..14ed0d7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/line6/capture.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/line6/capture.c > > @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ void line6_unlink_audio_in_urbs(struct snd_line6_pcm *line6pcm) > > if (test_bit(i, &line6pcm->active_urb_in)) { > > if (!test_and_set_bit(i, &line6pcm->unlink_urb_in)) { > > struct urb *u = line6pcm->urb_audio_in[i]; > > + > > usb_unlink_urb(u); > > } > > } > > @@ -122,6 +123,7 @@ void line6_wait_clear_audio_in_urbs(struct snd_line6_pcm *line6pcm) > > if (!alive) > > break; > > set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); > > + > > schedule_timeout(1); > > } while (--timeout > 0); > > if (alive) > > That line doesn't look like it needs to be added, why do so? > I've removed that new line in v2 of the patch. I sent it two days ago.