From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755986Ab1HUWNb (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:13:31 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:31887 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752842Ab1HUWN2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2011 18:13:28 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,260,1312182000"; d="scan'208";a="43624023" From: Andi Kleen To: Ondrej Zary Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, Kernel development list , Paul Mundt , Florian Tobias Schandinat Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] Resurrect Intel740 driver: i740fb References: <201108212242.12717.linux@rainbow-software.org> Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:13:27 -0700 In-Reply-To: <201108212242.12717.linux@rainbow-software.org> (Ondrej Zary's message of "Sun, 21 Aug 2011 22:42:06 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ondrej Zary writes: > > The i740_calc_fifo() function formatting is nice but does not pass > checkpatch. Making it checkpatch-compliant makes the code look ugly. How to > make it both nice and compatible with Linux coding style? When checkpatch.pl and sanity conflict, sanity should generally win. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only