* Re: [PATCH] KPC2000: kpc2000_spi.c: Fix style issues (line length)
2019-10-10 3:08 [PATCH] KPC2000: kpc2000_spi.c: Fix style issues (line length) Chandra Annamaneni
@ 2019-10-10 8:41 ` Greg KH
2019-10-10 14:54 ` Matt Sickler
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2019-10-10 8:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chandra Annamaneni
Cc: devel, gneukum1, fabian.krueger, linux-kernel, simon,
dan.carpenter
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 08:08:57PM -0700, Chandra Annamaneni wrote:
> Resoved: "WARNING: line over 80 characters" from checkpatch.pl
>
> Signed-off-by: Chandra Annamaneni <chandra627@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c
> index 3be33c4..ef78b6d 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c
> @@ -30,19 +30,19 @@
> #include "kpc.h"
>
> static struct mtd_partition p2kr0_spi0_parts[] = {
> - { .name = "SLOT_0", .size = 7798784, .offset = 0, },
> - { .name = "SLOT_1", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> - { .name = "SLOT_2", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> - { .name = "SLOT_3", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> - { .name = "CS0_EXTRA", .size = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> + { .name = "SLOT_0", .size = 7798784, .offset = 0,},
> + { .name = "SLOT_1", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> + { .name = "SLOT_2", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> + { .name = "SLOT_3", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> + { .name = "CS0_EXTRA", .size = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> };
>
> static struct mtd_partition p2kr0_spi1_parts[] = {
> - { .name = "SLOT_4", .size = 7798784, .offset = 0, },
> - { .name = "SLOT_5", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> - { .name = "SLOT_6", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> - { .name = "SLOT_7", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> - { .name = "CS1_EXTRA", .size = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> + { .name = "SLOT_4", .size = 7798784, .offset = 0,},
> + { .name = "SLOT_5", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> + { .name = "SLOT_6", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> + { .name = "SLOT_7", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> + { .name = "CS1_EXTRA", .size = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> };
>
> static struct flash_platform_data p2kr0_spi0_pdata = {
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Hi,
This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.
You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:
- You sent multiple patches, yet no indication of which ones should be
applied in which order. Greg could just guess, but if you are
receiving this email, he guessed wrong and the patches didn't apply.
Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for a description of how
to do this so that Greg has a chance to apply these correctly.
- You did not specify a description of why the patch is needed, or
possibly, any description at all, in the email body. Please read the
section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what is needed in order to
properly describe the change.
- You did not write a descriptive Subject: for the patch, allowing Greg,
and everyone else, to know what this patch is all about. Please read
the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what a proper Subject: line should
look like.
If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.
thanks,
greg k-h's patch email bot
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* RE: [PATCH] KPC2000: kpc2000_spi.c: Fix style issues (line length)
2019-10-10 3:08 [PATCH] KPC2000: kpc2000_spi.c: Fix style issues (line length) Chandra Annamaneni
2019-10-10 8:41 ` Greg KH
@ 2019-10-10 14:54 ` Matt Sickler
2019-10-11 10:02 ` Dan Carpenter
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Matt Sickler @ 2019-10-10 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chandra Annamaneni, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, gneukum1@gmail.com,
fabian.krueger@fau.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
simon@nikanor.nu, dan.carpenter@oracle.com
>-----Original Message-----
>From: devel <driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org> On Behalf Of Chandra Annamaneni
>Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2019 10:09 PM
>To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
>Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org; gneukum1@gmail.com; chandra627@gmail.com; fabian.krueger@fau.de; linux-
>kernel@vger.kernel.org; simon@nikanor.nu; dan.carpenter@oracle.com
>Subject: [PATCH] KPC2000: kpc2000_spi.c: Fix style issues (line length)
>
>Resoved: "WARNING: line over 80 characters" from checkpatch.pl
>
>Signed-off-by: Chandra Annamaneni <chandra627@gmail.com>
>---
> drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c
>index 3be33c4..ef78b6d 100644
>--- a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c
>+++ b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_spi.c
>@@ -30,19 +30,19 @@
> #include "kpc.h"
>
> static struct mtd_partition p2kr0_spi0_parts[] = {
>- { .name = "SLOT_0", .size = 7798784, .offset = 0, },
>- { .name = "SLOT_1", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>- { .name = "SLOT_2", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>- { .name = "SLOT_3", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>- { .name = "CS0_EXTRA", .size = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>+ { .name = "SLOT_0", .size = 7798784, .offset = 0,},
>+ { .name = "SLOT_1", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>+ { .name = "SLOT_2", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>+ { .name = "SLOT_3", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>+ { .name = "CS0_EXTRA", .size = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> };
>
> static struct mtd_partition p2kr0_spi1_parts[] = {
>- { .name = "SLOT_4", .size = 7798784, .offset = 0, },
>- { .name = "SLOT_5", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>- { .name = "SLOT_6", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>- { .name = "SLOT_7", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>- { .name = "CS1_EXTRA", .size = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>+ { .name = "SLOT_4", .size = 7798784, .offset = 0,},
>+ { .name = "SLOT_5", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>+ { .name = "SLOT_6", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>+ { .name = "SLOT_7", .size = 7798784, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
>+ { .name = "CS1_EXTRA", .size = MTDPART_SIZ_FULL, .offset = MTDPART_OFS_NXTBLK},
> };
>
> static struct flash_platform_data p2kr0_spi0_pdata = {
Is the line length limit a hard rule or can exceptions be made? I really feel that these data tables are more easily read when they're formatted like tables...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread