I remember checkpatch complained about aligning to the first argument. Somehow I cannot reproduce this now. Feel free to drop this patch.
Thank you. On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 12:11 PM Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 11:31:21AM -0700, r...@google.com wrote: > > From: Roman Kiryanov <r...@google.com> > > > > Address issues pointed by checkpatch.pl > > "issues"? Plural? > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roman Kiryanov <r...@google.com> > > --- > > drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_audio.c | 7 +++++-- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_audio.c > > b/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_audio.c > > index 3a4715cd362b..2bec3205326e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_audio.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_audio.c > > @@ -308,8 +308,11 @@ static int goldfish_audio_probe(struct platform_device > > *pdev) > > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "platform_get_irq failed\n"); > > return -ENODEV; > > } > > - data->buffer_virt = dmam_alloc_coherent(&pdev->dev, > > - COMBINED_BUFFER_SIZE, &buf_addr, GFP_KERNEL); > > + data->buffer_virt = > > + dmam_alloc_coherent(&pdev->dev, > > + COMBINED_BUFFER_SIZE, > > + &buf_addr, > > + GFP_KERNEL); > > Ick, why? What's wrong with the original code? > > Or better yet, how about: > data->buffer_virt = dmam_alloc_coherent(&pdev->dev, > COMBINED_BUFFER_SIZE, > &buf_addr, GFP_KERNEL); > > if you really want to get picky about it. > > thanks, > > greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
