Thread (1333 messages) 1333 messages, 109 authors, 2024-01-05

Re: [PATCH 8/8] cris-cryptocop: Apply another recommendation from "checkpatch.pl"

From: SF Markus Elfring <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-28 07:18:53
Also in: lkml

quoted
@@ -2276,7 +2277,10 @@ static int cryptocop_job_setup(struct cryptocop_prio_job **pj, struct cryptocop_
 		(*pj)->iop->ctx_in.saved_data = operation->list_op.inlist;
 		(*pj)->iop->ctx_in.saved_data_buf = operation->list_op.in_data_buf;
 	} else {
-		if ((err = cryptocop_setup_dma_list(operation, &(*pj)->iop, alloc_flag))) {
+		err = cryptocop_setup_dma_list(operation,
+					       &(*pj)->iop,
+					       alloc_flag);
Checkpatch didn't say to put every argument on a different line,
I agree to this information.

and that wasn't done before, so why do it now?
I tend to give each function parameter its own text line in such an use case
(for the known length limitation).

There is plenty of room for at least &(*pj)->iop on the line before.
This is true. - Do you prefer an other indentation approach here?

Regards,
Markus
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help