Message-ID: <1475870409.1945.11.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging:fbtft/fb_s6d02a1.c: fixed 80 character line
 limit coding
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Nadim Almas <nadim.902@gmail.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 13:00:09 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CANQNnfH6=7HCb6A-mEdusHX_JBo6mcii75R0mTKjpgRaiJ0RoQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20161007154302.GA4331@gmail.com>
         <20161007170716.GB20665@kroah.com>
         <CANQNnfH6=7HCb6A-mEdusHX_JBo6mcii75R0mTKjpgRaiJ0RoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1936
Lines: 51

On Sat, 2016-10-08 at 00:25 +0530, Nadim Almas wrote:
> why its seems worst to you i am just removing  "80 character line
> limit coding style"
> for the last 3 months I am trying to submit my first patch but patch
> is not accepted by you by giving reason i can't able to understand
> please help me

Taste in improving code is a difficult thing to acquire,
determine and utilize.

Keep on trying to improve the code and not just in ways
that shut-up brainless tools.

Please consider the difference between your initial patch
and this proposal: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9367167/

Apologies for not cc'ing you as your patch was what caused me
to look at this code at all.


> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:43:02AM -0700, Nadim Almas wrote:
> > > style issue
> > > 
> > > Fixed coding style issue
> > 
> > 
> > This does not seem like valid sentances that mean much to me.  Do they
> > to you?
> > 
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Nadim Almas <nadim.902@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_s6d02a1.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > >  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_s6d02a1.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_s6d02a1.c
> > > index 774b0ff..bc0c48f 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_s6d02a1.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_s6d02a1.c
> > > @@ -30,20 +30,27 @@ static int default_init_sequence[] = {
> > > 
> > >       -1, 0xfc, 0x5a, 0x5a,
> > > 
> > > -     -1, 0xfa, 0x02, 0x1f, 0x00, 0x10, 0x22, 0x30, 0x38, 0x3A, 0x3A, 0x3A, 0x3A, 0x3A, 0x3d, 0x02, 0x01,
> > > +     -1, 0xfa, 0x02, 0x1f, 0x00, 0x10, 0x22, 0x30, 0x38, 0x3A, 0x3A, 0x3A,
> > > +                                             0x3A, 0x3A, 0x3d, 0x02, 0x01,
> > 
> > 
> > This looks worse to me now, remember, checkpatch.pl is a "hint", not a
> > hard-and-fast-rule.  Use it wisely.