From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Anar Adilova <anaradilovab@gmail.com>
Cc: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: fbtft: Fix checkpatch warning
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:06:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170327120628.GA1249@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170324090244.mit7ciqsq6t2z35r@anar-Lenovo-Z50-70>
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 03:02:45PM +0600, Anar Adilova wrote:
> This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning:
>
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(foo); should immediately follow its function/variable.
>
> The EXPORT_SYMBOL statements are placed inside if blocks, after both function implementations.
>
Please always wrap your changelog text at 72 columns.
> Signed-off-by: Anar Adilova <anaradilovab@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
> index b742ee7..d2e3e8d 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
> @@ -284,6 +284,7 @@ void fbtft_unregister_backlight(struct fbtft_par *par)
> par->info->bl_dev = NULL;
> }
> }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(fbtft_unregister_backlight);
>
> static const struct backlight_ops fbtft_bl_ops = {
> .get_brightness = fbtft_backlight_get_brightness,
> @@ -321,12 +322,13 @@ void fbtft_register_backlight(struct fbtft_par *par)
> if (!par->fbtftops.unregister_backlight)
> par->fbtftops.unregister_backlight = fbtft_unregister_backlight;
> }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(fbtft_register_backlight);
> #else
> void fbtft_register_backlight(struct fbtft_par *par) { };
> -void fbtft_unregister_backlight(struct fbtft_par *par) { };
> -#endif
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(fbtft_register_backlight);
> +void fbtft_unregister_backlight(struct fbtft_par *par) { };
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(fbtft_unregister_backlight);
> +#endif
No, the original code here is "nicer" in that you don't have duplicate
declarations like your change added.
You can ignore the checkpatch warning here.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-27 12:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-24 9:02 [PATCH] Staging: fbtft: Fix checkpatch warning Anar Adilova
2017-03-27 12:06 ` Greg KH [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-09-28 9:59 [PATCH] staging: " Carlos Palminha
2016-09-28 10:05 ` Greg KH
2016-09-28 9:43 Carlos Palminha
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170327120628.GA1249@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=anaradilovab@gmail.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox