[B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH] batman-adv: checkpatch cleanup - remove lines longer than 80 chars
The long line was introduced with b26e478f8f.
Signed-off-by: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de --- net/batman-adv/translation-table.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/batman-adv/translation-table.c b/net/batman-adv/translation-table.c index ab8dea8..58361ed 100644 --- a/net/batman-adv/translation-table.c +++ b/net/batman-adv/translation-table.c @@ -679,7 +679,7 @@ void tt_global_del(struct bat_priv *bat_priv, * 2) the client roamed to us => we can directly delete * the global entry, since it is useless now. */ tt_local_entry = tt_local_hash_find(bat_priv, - tt_global_entry->common.addr); + tt_global_entry->common.addr); if (!tt_local_entry) { tt_global_entry->common.flags |= TT_CLIENT_ROAM; tt_global_entry->roam_at = jiffies;
From: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:38:24 +0800
The long line was introduced with b26e478f8f.
Signed-off-by: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de
I'm not applying this.
I tell people to make sure arguments line up correctly to the openning parenthesis on the previous line, and that is what is happening here.
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 02:32:30 David Miller wrote:
From: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:38:24 +0800
The long line was introduced with b26e478f8f.
Signed-off-by: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de
I'm not applying this.
I tell people to make sure arguments line up correctly to the openning parenthesis on the previous line, and that is what is happening here.
I am not against lining up the arguments but what about checkpatch ? Are we going to ignore the complaints or is this line limit about to be changed ?
Cheers, Marek
From: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 02:59:41 +0800
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 02:32:30 David Miller wrote:
From: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:38:24 +0800
The long line was introduced with b26e478f8f.
Signed-off-by: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de
I'm not applying this.
I tell people to make sure arguments line up correctly to the openning parenthesis on the previous line, and that is what is happening here.
I am not against lining up the arguments but what about checkpatch ? Are we going to ignore the complaints or is this line limit about to be changed ?
Refactor the code so that both constraints can be satisfied.
Is this so hard to understand?
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 03:02:09 David Miller wrote:
From: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 02:59:41 +0800
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 02:32:30 David Miller wrote:
From: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:38:24 +0800
The long line was introduced with b26e478f8f.
Signed-off-by: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de
I'm not applying this.
I tell people to make sure arguments line up correctly to the openning parenthesis on the previous line, and that is what is happening here.
I am not against lining up the arguments but what about checkpatch ? Are we going to ignore the complaints or is this line limit about to be changed ?
Refactor the code so that both constraints can be satisfied.
Is this so hard to understand?
Well, my crystal ball did not unveil that a checkpatch complaint you silently introduced would mean somebody else has to refactor the code. Guess I have to get a replacement unit.
Cheers, Marek
On Wed, 2011-12-21 at 03:15 +0800, Marek Lindner wrote:
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 03:02:09 David Miller wrote:
From: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 02:59:41 +0800
On Wednesday, December 21, 2011 02:32:30 David Miller wrote:
From: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:38:24 +0800
The long line was introduced with b26e478f8f.
Signed-off-by: Marek Lindner lindner_marek@yahoo.de
I'm not applying this.
I tell people to make sure arguments line up correctly to the openning parenthesis on the previous line, and that is what is happening here.
I am not against lining up the arguments but what about checkpatch ? Are we going to ignore the complaints or is this line limit about to be changed ?
Refactor the code so that both constraints can be satisfied.
Is this so hard to understand?
Well, my crystal ball did not unveil that a checkpatch complaint you silently introduced would mean somebody else has to refactor the code. Guess I have to get a replacement unit.
No-one has to refactor the code. I think David's point is that he's more concerned about proper alignment than having every line under 80 characters. If you want to satisfy the latter constraint, you still have to satisfy the former.
Ben.
b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
-
Ben Hutchings -
David Miller -
Marek Lindner