On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 22:22 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 28.03.2015 um 22:18 schrieb Joe Perches:
> > On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 21:40 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> >> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Shirish Gajera <gshirishf...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning:
[]
> >> Instead of blindly adding newlines to silence checkpatch.pl, what
> >> about reworking the code?
> >> printf("%s\n", ..) cries for a puts().
> >
> > There is no synth_puts
>
> So what?
> Fix it! :-)
Not sure that'd make the code better... ;-p
> the whole code is horrible and lines other 80 chars are the *least*
> problem.
Dunno about how horrible it is, my guess is it works.
> Submitting a patch just for the sake of silencing checkpatch.pl is a waste of
> time.
> After applying this patch the driver 0 better than before.
Agree with that.
And truly, checkpatch is only a guide.
Making the code better instead of merely style conforming
should be the primary goal of patches.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
