RE: [net 2/8] igb: fix vf lookup

-----Original Message-----
From: David Miller [mailto:davem@davemloft.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 3:53 PM
To: joe@perches.com
Cc: Rose, Gregory V; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; netdev@vger.kernel.org;
gospo@redhat.com; sassmann@redhat.com; stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net 2/8] igb: fix vf lookup

From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:49:40 -0800

quoted

On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 23:42 +0000, Rose, Gregory V wrote:

quoted

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c

[]

quoted

quoted

@@ -5012,7 +5012,8 @@ static int igb_find_enabled_vfs(struct

igb_adapter

quoted

quoted

quoted

*adapter)
 	vf_devfn = pdev->devfn + 0x80;
 	pvfdev = pci_get_device(hw->vendor_id, device_id, NULL);
 	while (pvfdev) {
-		if (pvfdev->devfn == vf_devfn)
+		if (pvfdev->devfn == vf_devfn &&
+		    (pvfdev->bus->number >= pdev->bus->number))
 			vfs_found++;

[]

quoted

I'll fix this one too.  You start leaning on checkpatch and you get

lazy I guess.

quoted

I suppose an indentation rule could be created when
arguments on multiple lines don't align at the open
parenthesis, but I'm not going to rewrite emacs
indentation rules.

Presumably it should only be used with --strict.

Anyone think multiple line tests with inequivalent uses
of parentheses like this one should be noted as well?

Actually I thought this case was perfectly fine.

The imbalanced parenthesis usage bothers me.  And yes, if you're going to have a tool that checks patch formatting it'd be nice if it caught things like this.  But then I'm the lazy fool here...

- Greg