From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755924Ab3LVWNp (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Dec 2013 17:13:45 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0077.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.77]:40870 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754262Ab3LVWNo (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Dec 2013 17:13:44 -0500 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:960:968:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1541:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2559:2562:2828:2914:2915:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3622:3865:3868:3870:3871:3872:3873:3874:4321:5007:7652:10004:10400:10848:11026:11232:11658:11914:12296:12438:12517:12519:12740:13069:13161:13229:13311:13357:13972,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: drain14_3d71c7b5d770c X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2124 Message-ID: <1387750419.22671.25.camel@joe-AO722> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: firmware: edd: fixed coding style errors From: Joe Perches To: Derek Perrin Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 14:13:39 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1387747039-14098-1-git-send-email-d.roc16@gmail.com> References: <1387747039-14098-1-git-send-email-d.roc16@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2013-12-22 at 15:17 -0600, Derek Perrin wrote: > Fixed coding style errors. Spaces, tab and parenthesis errors. There's a real error in this patch. When you do whitespace only changes, please verify that the old and new object files produced are unchanged. One trivial bit too, > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/edd.c b/drivers/firmware/edd.c [] > @@ -62,8 +62,8 @@ struct edd_device { > > struct edd_attribute { > struct attribute attr; > - ssize_t(*show) (struct edd_device * edev, char *buf); > - int (*test) (struct edd_device * edev); > + ssize_t(*show) (struct edd_device *edev, char *buf); > + int (*test) (struct edd_device *edev); I think most prefer function pointer prototypes like: size_t (*show)(struct edd_device *edev, char *buf); int (*test)(struct edd_device *edev); > @@ -791,7 +791,7 @@ edd_exit(void) > struct edd_device *edev; > > for (i = 0; i < edd_num_devices(); i++) { > - if ((edev = edd_devices[i])) > + if ((edev == edd_devices[i])) > edd_device_unregister(edev); > } > kset_unregister(edd_kset); This is wrong. It's an assignment in the block and it's important. This could be rewritten as: for (i = 0; i < edd_num_devices(); i++) { edev = edd_devices[i]; if (edev) edd_device_unregister(edev); } or just remove the temporary.