Message-ID: <1459273107.25110.91.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] staging: fwserial: (coding style) Rewriting a call
 to a long function
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Dominique van den Broeck <domdevlin@free.fr>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
        Shraddha Barke <shraddha.6596@gmail.com>,
        Radek Dostal <rd@radekdostal.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 10:38:27 -0700
In-Reply-To: <1459271662-14990-3-git-send-email-domdevlin@free.fr>
References: <1459271662-14990-1-git-send-email-domdevlin@free.fr>
	 <1459271662-14990-3-git-send-email-domdevlin@free.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 952
Lines: 28

On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 19:14 +0200, Dominique van den Broeck wrote:
> Fixing a lone row exceeding 80 columns so the only remaining warnings
> emitted by checkpatch.pl are missing comments on spinlocks and memory
> barriers.
[]
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fwserial/fwserial.c b/drivers/staging/fwserial/fwserial.c
[]
> @@ -1343,9 +1343,11 @@ static int fwtty_break_ctl(struct tty_struct *tty, int state)
> ?
> ?	if (state == -1) {
> ?		set_bit(STOP_TX, &port->flags);
> -		ret = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(port->wait_tx,
> -					???????!test_bit(IN_TX, &port->flags),
> -					???????10);
> +		ret =
> +		wait_event_interruptible_timeout(port->wait_tx,
> +						?!test_bit(IN_TX, &port->flags),
> +						?10);

Does this really look better to you?

Long identifiers like "wait_event_interruptible_timeout"
(32 chars) make
using 80 columns a bit silly.

Please remember checkpatch is a stupid script and that
not every warning it emits is dicta.