Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] cxgb4: Add T4 filter support

From: Vipul Pandya <redacted>
Date: Mon,  3 Dec 2012 16:52:57 +0530

+	/*
+	 * If the new or old filter have loopback rewriteing rules then we'll
+	 * need to free any existing Layer Two Table (L2T) entries of the old
+	 * filter rule.  The firmware will handle freeing up any Source MAC
+	 * Table (SMT) entries used for rewriting Source MAC Addresses in
+	 * loopback rules.
+	 */
+	if (f->l2t)
+		cxgb4_l2t_release(f->l2t);
+
+	/* The zeroing of the filter rule below clears the filter valid,
+	 * pending, locked flags, l2t pointer, etc. so it's all we need for
+	 * this operation.
+	 */

My greatest amusement is achieved when someone gets a code formatting
rule both correct and wrong in the same patch, as you have done here.

Format comments in the networking:

	/* Like
	 * this.
	 */

	 /*
	  * Never,
	  * like this.
	  */

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On 04-12-2012 00:32, David Miller wrote:

From: Vipul Pandya <redacted>
Date: Mon,  3 Dec 2012 16:52:57 +0530

quoted

+	/*
+	 * If the new or old filter have loopback rewriteing rules then we'll
+	 * need to free any existing Layer Two Table (L2T) entries of the old
+	 * filter rule.  The firmware will handle freeing up any Source MAC
+	 * Table (SMT) entries used for rewriting Source MAC Addresses in
+	 * loopback rules.
+	 */
+	if (f->l2t)
+		cxgb4_l2t_release(f->l2t);
+
+	/* The zeroing of the filter rule below clears the filter valid,
+	 * pending, locked flags, l2t pointer, etc. so it's all we need for
+	 * this operation.
+	 */

My greatest amusement is achieved when someone gets a code formatting
rule both correct and wrong in the same patch, as you have done here.

Format comments in the networking:

	/* Like
	 * this.
	 */

	 /*
	  * Never,
	  * like this.
	  */

Thanks.

I have submitted the series again making above changes. Thanks for
pointing out the same. I wonder how checkpatch.pl did not complain or
gave a warning for the incorrect commenting style. I corrected only
those comments for which checkpatch.pl gave me a warning. So, I think
there are some checks missing in checkpatch.pl script.

Thanks,
Vipul