Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: gpio: add virtio-gpio guest driver
To:     Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>,
        "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@metux.net>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
        linux-gpio <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
References: <20201127183003.2849-1-info@metux.net>
 <CAMpxmJXJLTzM20xLCoM4spjibXbA-FfdPmOBp1QcV+9cScNNMw@mail.gmail.com>
 <f14c0197-b346-7af5-9dd0-9b8018baaeaf@metux.net>
 <b287f185d554b5a87b82ea8ca79cb5a2@walle.cc>
From:   "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@metux.net>
Message-ID: <8ab347b9-8b1a-f49f-d194-f98284fa6099@metux.net>
Date:   Fri, 4 Dec 2020 09:28:24 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b287f185d554b5a87b82ea8ca79cb5a2@walle.cc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: tl
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 03.12.20 23:35, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am 2020-12-03 20:00, schrieb Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult:
>> On 02.12.20 15:15, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>> +               bufwalk = name_buffer;
>>>> +
>>>> +               while (idx < priv->num_gpios &&
>>>> +                      bufwalk < (name_buffer+cf.names_size)) {
>>>> +                       gpio_names[idx] = (strlen(bufwalk) ? bufwalk
>>>> : NULL);
>>>> +                       bufwalk += strlen(bufwalk)+1;
>>>> +                       idx++;
>>>
>>>
>>> Something's wrong with indentation here.
>>
>> i dont think so: the "bufwalk ..." line belongs to the while expression
>> and is right under the "idx", as it should be. I didn't want to break up
>> at the "<" operator. shall i do this instead ?
> 
> Or don't break the lines at all. Both lines don't add up to more than
> 100 chars,
> right?

IIRC checkpatch complains at 80 chars. Has that been changed ?


--mtx


-- 
---
Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert
werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren
GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu.
---
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287