Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757877AbcCRRtn (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2016 13:49:43 -0400 Received: from lists.s-osg.org ([54.187.51.154]:54697 "EHLO lists.s-osg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757627AbcCRRtk (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2016 13:49:40 -0400 Message-ID: <56EC3FB0.8020006@osg.samsung.com> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 17:49:36 +0000 From: Luis de Bethencourt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joe Perches , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CC: johannes@sipsolutions.net, davem@davemloft.net, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: fix order of flag descriptions References: <1458317369-28185-1-git-send-email-luisbg@osg.samsung.com> <1458318955-32070-1-git-send-email-luisbg@osg.samsung.com> <1458322179.26915.2.camel@perches.com> <56EC3DA6.2090105@osg.samsung.com> <1458323163.26915.8.camel@perches.com> In-Reply-To: <1458323163.26915.8.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1206 Lines: 31 On 18/03/16 17:46, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 17:40 +0000, Luis de Bethencourt wrote: >> On 18/03/16 17:29, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Fri, 2016-03-18 at 16:35 +0000, Luis de Bethencourt wrote: >>>> Fix order of mac80211_rx_flags description to match the enum. > [] >>>> I want ahead and fixed the order of the descriptions. checkpatch.pl was giving >>>> a warning to my previous patch and I had a hunch it was because the wrong order >>>> breaks the parser. Indeed it does and with this patch below checkpatch.pl does >>>> not complain about this flag descriptions anymore. >>> checkpatch complains? About what? >> warning: Enum value 'RX_FLAG_DUP_VALIDATED' not described in enum 'mac80211_rx_flags' > > That's not a checkpatch warning. > > cheers, Joe > Oh no! Joe is right. That isn't a checkpatch warning, but checkpatch just printing the line in my commit message that goes over 75 characters. Which I kept that big to keep the format from make htmldocs. I still think the order of the documentation should match the enum regardless, it is nicer for developers reading the code. Sorry :( my bad for misinterpreting checkpatch's output. Thanks you Joe for correcting me, Luis