Replace unsigned with unsigned int to improve readability.
Signed-off-by: Bharath Vedartham <[email protected]>
---
block/badblocks.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/badblocks.c b/block/badblocks.c
index 91f7bcf..e3f90c9 100644
--- a/block/badblocks.c
+++ b/block/badblocks.c
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ int badblocks_check(struct badblocks *bb, sector_t s, int sectors,
u64 *p = bb->page;
int rv;
sector_t target = s + sectors;
- unsigned seq;
+ unsigned int seq;
if (bb->shift > 0) {
/* round the start down, and the end up */
--
2.7.4
On 2/24/19 7:19 AM, Bharath Vedartham wrote:
> Replace unsigned with unsigned int to improve readability.
Frivolous change, would make a lot more sense to get checkpatch
to stop complaining about this.
--
Jens Axboe
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 08:15:30AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2/24/19 7:19 AM, Bharath Vedartham wrote:
> > Replace unsigned with unsigned int to improve readability.
>
> Frivolous change, would make a lot more sense to get checkpatch
> to stop complaining about this.
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
I understand. I am starting out kernel hacking. I have been working on
fixing checkpatch.pl warnings. If you have any tasks for me in the
kernel, it would be great.
I have also noticed a lot of warnings to replace printk with subsystem
specific warning functions. Is that a valuable change?
Bharath
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 4:38 PM Bharath Vedartham <[email protected]> wrote:
> I understand. I am starting out kernel hacking. I have been working on
> fixing checkpatch.pl warnings. If you have any tasks for me in the
> kernel, it would be great.
>
> I have also noticed a lot of warnings to replace printk with subsystem
> specific warning functions. Is that a valuable change?
This is a very good start:
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/2017-April/017765.html
Happy hacking and welcome! :-)
--
Thanks,
//richard
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 04:50:51PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 4:38 PM Bharath Vedartham <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I understand. I am starting out kernel hacking. I have been working on
> > fixing checkpatch.pl warnings. If you have any tasks for me in the
> > kernel, it would be great.
> >
> > I have also noticed a lot of warnings to replace printk with subsystem
> > specific warning functions. Is that a valuable change?
>
> This is a very good start:
> https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/2017-April/017765.html
>
> Happy hacking and welcome! :-)
>
> --
> Thanks,
> //richard
Hey! Thanks for the link Richard! I have read it and clearly understood
the message. I will work on understanding the kernel and writing my own
code for my own personal learning before jumping into tasks! Thanks for
your time!
Bharath