On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:21:37AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 07:15:11PM +0000, Daniel Lockyer wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 09:56:39AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 05:53:55PM +0000, Daniel Lockyer wrote:
> > > > Fixed a coding style issue.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lockyer <thisisdaniellock...@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h | 1 +
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> > > > b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> > > > index 8f20910..3bb8c1b 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> > > > @@ -1166,6 +1166,7 @@ typedef struct hfa384x_usbctlx {
> > > > CTLX_STATE state; /* Tracks running state */
> > > >
> > > > struct completion done;
> > > > +
> > > > volatile int reapable; /* Food for the reaper task */
> > > >
> > > > ctlx_cmdcb_t cmdcb; /* Async command callback */
> > >
> > > What coding style issue does this fix? It looks wrong to me.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > greg k-h
> >
> > I used checkpatch.pl on the file and it returns "WARNING: Missing a
> > blank line after declarations".
> >
> > I can't see anything specific in the CodingStyle file. Is this an
> > error on checkpatch.pl's behalf?
>
> Yes, older versions of checkpatch couldn't understand 'volatile', newer
> versions should properly tell you that you need to delete the line after
> reapable, not add one before.
>
> Use your brain when reading checkpatch results, it's not always the
> smartest thing, it's a perl script :)
Ah okay, I understand now! This was my first time sending a patch, I'll check
it out more carefully next time. :)
Thanks for your help,
Daniel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
