On 23-08-15, 21:09, Muhammad Falak R Wani wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch fixes issues in coding style, of a missing blank line after
> declarations.
>
> Best,
> mfrw
This is as ugly as it could be. Please go through
Documentation/SubmittingPatches and other related stuff to see you to
send patches.
> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Falak R Wani <falakre...@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 8ae655c..5aea659 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -718,6 +718,7 @@ static ssize_t show_bios_limit(struct cpufreq_policy
> *policy, char *buf)
> {
> unsigned int limit;
> int ret;
> +
> if (cpufreq_driver->bios_limit) {
> ret = cpufreq_driver->bios_limit(policy->cpu, &limit);
> if (!ret)
> @@ -815,6 +816,7 @@ unlock:
> static void cpufreq_sysfs_release(struct kobject *kobj)
> {
> struct cpufreq_policy *policy = to_policy(kobj);
> +
> pr_debug("last reference is dropped\n");
> complete(&policy->kobj_unregister);
> }
> @@ -2129,6 +2131,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_unregister_governor);
> int cpufreq_get_policy(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int cpu)
> {
> struct cpufreq_policy *cpu_policy;
> +
> if (!policy)
> return -EINVAL;
And then these changes are all trivial and not at all important. We
don't want a patch for that even if checkpatch complains.
--
viresh
--
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/
