On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 12:46:13PM -0800, Rosen Penev wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2026 at 3:30 AM Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Bart,
> >
> > On 2026-11-09 10:01, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > >>  static const struct of_device_id ppc44x_gpio_match[] = {
> > >> -    {
> > >> -            .compatible = "ibm,ppc4xx-gpio",
> > >> -    },
> > >> +    { .compatible = "ibm,ppc4xx-gpio" },
> > >>      {},
> > >
> > > Uwe: is this in line with your recent cleanups?
> > The change is fine, I'd appreciate to also do
> >
> > -       {},
> > +       { }
> >
> > at the same time.
> {} was done by clang-format IIRC.

I saw that already, too. I'd argue that clang-format is wrong here, with
non-empty initializers we want a space after the opening brance and
before the closing one.

Last time I looked (and IIRC), the kernel intended to still work with an
old version of clang-format and that doesn't distinguish between a space
between { } and ( ). For the latter we don't want a space, so there is
no way to configure clang-format to do the right thing. That's better
with newer clang-format versions, but I didn't find a way to specify { }
and () without breaking older clang-format.

Best regards
Uwe