On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 08:00:36PM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> I think it boils down to which lines I typed myself :-) (I tend to
> prefer (...), personally).
Well, "return" is an operator, not a function - but more importantly
the style document was changed at some point in the past to not use
> On Jun 14, 2018, at 3:12 PM, Paul Goyette wrote:
>
> BTW, why do you use
>
> return (0);
>
> in some of the drivers, while others use
>
> return 0;
>
> ?
>
> Shouldn't we standardise on one or the other?
I think it boils down to which lines I typed myself :-) (I tend to pr
BTW, why do you use
return (0);
in some of the drivers, while others use
return 0;
?
Shouldn't we standardise on one or the other?
Sorry, just nit-picking - the actual changes look pretty much ok to me.
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, Jason Thorpe wrote:
I???ve gone through all of
Man, those "smart quotes" things make your Emails nearly impossible to
read. Any chance you can turn it off when sending to NetBSD lists?
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, Jason Thorpe wrote:
I???ve gone through all of the i2c drivers I can find in the source tree and
audited their auto configuration sc
I’ve gone through all of the i2c drivers I can find in the source tree and
audited their auto configuration scheme. Each of the drivers has been updated
to return the “match quality” values introduced in the previous set of changes.
To review, those “match quality” values are:
— Address-only: