On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:52:41AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> So, when I'm reviewing these, there are obviously a lot of patches that
> go through staging and I try to do them as fast as possible and quite
> often make mistakes. Feel free to speak up when that happens, I won't
> be offended.
>
So, when I'm reviewing these, there are obviously a lot of patches that
go through staging and I try to do them as fast as possible and quite
often make mistakes. Feel free to speak up when that happens, I won't
be offended.
I use a script to review them which strips our all the white space
chang
No actually, what you did is fine. It all sort of hangs together...
You may as well get rid of the ctrl parameter when you get rid of the
macro otherwise it just creates a lot of busy work.
Reviewed-by: Dan Carpenter
regards,
dan carpenter
___
devel
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:03:43AM -0200, Elise Lennion wrote:
> Every call to the function waitNextVerticalSync() used the macro
> primaryWaitVerticalSync(), so the macro was removed and the function
> waitNextVerticalSync() renamed to primary_wait_vertical_sync().
>
> With this change, an unnece
Every call to the function waitNextVerticalSync() used the macro
primaryWaitVerticalSync(), so the macro was removed and the function
waitNextVerticalSync() renamed to primary_wait_vertical_sync().
With this change, an unnecessary 'if' statement was removed together
with the lines within the 'else
