[PATCH 1/1] dt: fix some code indent issue in of.h

Dong Aisheng-B29396 B29396 at freescale.com
Tue Dec 20 21:57:58 EST 2011


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Herring [mailto:robherring2 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 2:42 AM
> To: Dong Aisheng-B29396
> Cc: devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; linux-
> arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; grant.likely at secretlab.ca; Guo Shawn-R65073
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt: fix some code indent issue in of.h
> Importance: High
> 
> On 12/20/2011 12:10 PM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> > From: Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng at linaro.org>
> >
> > Checkpatch script will report some warnings for the old coding style:
> > WARNING: suspect code indent for conditional statements (8, 0)
> >         for (child = of_get_next_child(parent, NULL); child != NULL; \
> > [...]
> > +static inline int of_get_child_count(const struct device_node *np)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng at linaro.org>
> > Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely at secretlab.ca>
> > Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring at calxeda.com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/of.h |   12 ++++++------
> >  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/of.h b/include/linux/of.h index
> > f1a490c..95dee0a 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/of.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> > @@ -163,22 +163,22 @@ extern struct device_node *of_find_node_by_name(struct
> device_node *from,
> >  	const char *name);
> >  #define for_each_node_by_name(dn, name) \
> >  	for (dn = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, name); dn; \
> > -	     dn = of_find_node_by_name(dn, name))
> > +		dn = of_find_node_by_name(dn, name))
> >  extern struct device_node *of_find_node_by_type(struct device_node *from,
> >  	const char *type);
> >  #define for_each_node_by_type(dn, type) \
> >  	for (dn = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, type); dn; \
> > -	     dn = of_find_node_by_type(dn, type))
> > +		dn = of_find_node_by_type(dn, type))
> >  extern struct device_node *of_find_compatible_node(struct device_node *from,
> >  	const char *type, const char *compat);  #define
> > for_each_compatible_node(dn, type, compatible) \
> >  	for (dn = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, type, compatible); dn; \
> > -	     dn = of_find_compatible_node(dn, type, compatible))
> > +		dn = of_find_compatible_node(dn, type, compatible))
> >  extern struct device_node *of_find_matching_node(struct device_node *from,
> >  	const struct of_device_id *matches);  #define
> > for_each_matching_node(dn, matches) \
> >  	for (dn = of_find_matching_node(NULL, matches); dn; \
> > -	     dn = of_find_matching_node(dn, matches))
> > +		dn = of_find_matching_node(dn, matches))
> >  extern struct device_node *of_find_node_by_path(const char *path);
> > extern struct device_node *of_find_node_by_phandle(phandle handle);
> > extern struct device_node *of_get_parent(const struct device_node
> > *node); @@ -187,13 +187,13 @@ extern struct device_node
> *of_get_next_child(const struct device_node *node,
> >  					     struct device_node *prev);
> >  #define for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) \
> >  	for (child = of_get_next_child(parent, NULL); child != NULL; \
> > -	     child = of_get_next_child(parent, child))
> > +		child = of_get_next_child(parent, child))
> >
> >  extern struct device_node *of_find_node_with_property(
> >  	struct device_node *from, const char *prop_name);  #define
> > for_each_node_with_property(dn, prop_name) \
> >  	for (dn = of_find_node_with_property(NULL, prop_name); dn; \
> > -	     dn = of_find_node_with_property(dn, prop_name))
> > +		dn = of_find_node_with_property(dn, prop_name))
> >
> >  extern struct property *of_find_property(const struct device_node *np,
> >  					 const char *name,
> 
> The old way looks fine to me and indenting like this is commonly used in the
> kernel.
> 
Yes, i was also ok without those annoying warning.
Do you think if we need to fix the checkpatch.pl if the it is commonly used
In the kernel?

Regards
Dong Aisheng





More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list