Dear Zang Roy-R61911,
[excessive Cc: list trimmed]
In message
<2239ac579c7d3646a720227a37e02681157...@039-sn1mpn1-004.039d.mgd.msft.net> you
wrote:
>
> > Please fix the checkpatch warnings (7 lines over 80 characters)
>
> I can fix it. In fact, I use checkpatch every time before I send out patch.
Then I do not understand why you submitted the patch at all before
cleaning it up.
> If you check the board header file, most of them has this problem.
Cleanup patches are welcome.
> Do you think
> + /* physical addr of CCSRBAR */
> +#define CONFIG_SYS_CCSRBAR_PHYS CONFIG_SYS_CCSRBAR
> is better than
> +#define CONFIG_SYS_CCSRBAR_PHYS CONFIG_SYS_CCSRBAR /* physical
> addr of CCSRBAR */
> ???
> Please clarify.
At least the first version does not violate coding style requirements.
Regarding the general topic of comments - there are such and such
comments. Things like
i = i + 1; /* Increment variable i by one */
are gratuitous and of no use at all.
In your example above, I ask myself why we need
CONFIG_SYS_CCSRBAR_PHYS at all when whe already have
CONFIG_SYS_CCSRBAR (or vice versa).
And why we need a comment that explains this in grat detail - separate
for each single macro.
Please re-read "Chapter 8: Commenting" in the coding-style document
for more details.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
The philosophy exam was a piece of cake - which was a bit of a
surprise, actually, because I was expecting some questions on a sheet
of paper.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
