From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Subject: Re: ISDN-CAPI: Adjust 17 function calls together with variable assignments Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:28:58 +0200 Message-ID: <16c50966-66f2-8a08-0ebc-936b04311f14@users.sourceforge.net> References: <10355972-1c9b-1103-edf3-efde78237cdd@users.sourceforge.net> <1474881174.1846.8.camel@tiscali.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Karsten Keil , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall To: Paul Bolle Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1474881174.1846.8.camel@tiscali.nl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org >> The script "checkpatch.pl" can point out that assignments should usually >> not be performed within condition checks. >> Thus move the assignment for a variable to a separate statement >> in four functions. > > Did you recycle this commit explanation? Yes. - I am going to use similar commit messages for further changes in other software modules. > Because git diff tells me you actually touched about eight functions. You are right. - I'm sorry that I overlooked to update this number somehow. > scripts/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/isdn/capi/capidrv.c | grep "assignment in if condition" | wc -l > > It tells me there are actually 18 instances of this "ERROR". > Why did you ignore one of it in this patch? Did I accidentally leave another update candidate over? * How do you think about to pick such a software update opportunity up? * Do you expect a resend for the steps 3 - 5 of this small patch series? Regards, Markus