fixing the coding style changes

PATCH In review saurabh 3 participants 3 messages Oct 25, 2015 USB

lore

Share & tools

lore

saurabh

author

2015-10-25 06:47 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 fixing the coding style changes

Quoted 1 line

From 999005638f8d3f95075fdfdc6bf8f7ff88810f5d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: Saurabh Sengar <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 08:58:42 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] fixing the coding style changes

Attached a patch whic fixes the checkpatch.pl script error Here, couple of static variables were initialise to 0 which was violating the linux coding style standards.

diffstat for this patch is:
hub.c | 4 ++--

1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

To apply the patch, in the root of a kernel tree use:
patch -p1 < 0001-fixing-the-coding-style-changes.patch

Signed-off-by Saurabh Sengar <[email protected]>

---
 drivers/usb/core/hub.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

drivers/usb/core/hub.c +2 -2

index 431839b..6abc4ab 100644
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ static void hub_event(struct work_struct *work);
 DEFINE_MUTEX(usb_port_peer_mutex);
 
 /* cycle leds on hubs that aren't blinking for attention */
-static bool blinkenlights = 0;
+static bool blinkenlights;
 module_param(blinkenlights, bool, S_IRUGO);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(blinkenlights, "true to cycle leds on hubs");

@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(initial_descriptor_timeout,
  * otherwise the new scheme is used.  If that fails and "use_both_schemes"
  * is set, then the driver will make another attempt, using the other scheme.
  */
-static bool old_scheme_first = 0;
+static bool old_scheme_first;
 module_param(old_scheme_first, bool, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(old_scheme_first,
 		 "start with the old device initialization scheme");

Signature · 1 line

1.9.1

This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux kernel tree.

You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s) as indicated below:

- You sent multiple patches, yet no indication of which ones should be applied in which order. Greg could just guess, but if you are receiving this email, he guessed wrong and the patches didn't apply. Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for a description of how to do this so that Greg has a chance to apply these correctly.

- You did not write a descriptive Subject: for the patch, allowing Greg, and everyone else, to know what this patch is all about. Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what a proper Subject: line should look like.

If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received from other developers.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot

Albino B Neto

2015-10-25 19:41 UTC #2 lore raw

In reply to saurabh

2015-10-25 4:47 GMT-02:00 saurabh <[email protected]>:

Quoted 4 lines

From 999005638f8d3f95075fdfdc6bf8f7ff88810f5d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Saurabh Sengar <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 08:58:42 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] fixing the coding style changes

You should read Documentation/SubmittingPatches for a description of how do.

Albino