staging: dgnc: Fix long line and spelling mistake
PATCH v2 1/1 staging: dgnc: Fix long line and spelling mistake
This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning: Line over 80 characters. Also, the word 'because' was spelled as 'Becuz' and has been corrected.
---
Changes in v2:
Format the commit message to not have too short lines.
drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_neo.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_neo.c +18 -6
@@ -107,7 +107,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_cts_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)/* Turn off auto Xon flow control */ efr &= ~UART_17158_EFR_IXON ; -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */
@@ -143,7 +145,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_rts_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch) ier &= ~UART_17158_IER_XOFF ; efr &= ~UART_17158_EFR_IXOFF ; -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */
@@ -181,7 +185,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_ixon_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)/* Turn on auto Xon flow control */ efr |= (UART_17158_EFR_ECB |UART_17158_EFR_IXON ); -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */
@@ -219,7 +225,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_ixoff_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch) ier |=UART_17158_IER_XOFF ; efr |= (UART_17158_EFR_ECB |UART_17158_EFR_IXOFF ); -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */
@@ -260,7 +268,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_no_input_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)else efr &= ~(UART_17158_EFR_ECB |UART_17158_EFR_IXOFF ); -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero +* it out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */
@@ -298,7 +308,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_no_output_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)else efr &= ~(UART_17158_EFR_ECB |UART_17158_EFR_IXON ); -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */
Signature · 1 line
2.7.4
Quoted 2 lines · Rehas Sachdeva
This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning: Line over 80 characters. Also, the word 'because' was spelled as 'Becuz' and has been corrected.
Looks much betetr :)
julia
Quoted 89 lines
Signed-off-by Rehas Sachdeva <[email protected]>---
Changes in v2:
Format the commit message to not have too short lines.drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_neo.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_neo.c +18
-7@@ -107,7 +107,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_cts_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)/* Turn off auto Xon flow control */ efr &= ~UART_17158_EFR_IXON ; -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */ @@ -143,7 +145,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_rts_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch) ier &= ~UART_17158_IER_XOFF ; efr &= ~UART_17158_EFR_IXOFF ; -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */ @@ -181,7 +185,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_ixon_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)/* Turn on auto Xon flow control */ efr |= (UART_17158_EFR_ECB |UART_17158_EFR_IXON ); -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */ @@ -219,7 +225,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_ixoff_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch) ier |=UART_17158_IER_XOFF ; efr |= (UART_17158_EFR_ECB |UART_17158_EFR_IXOFF ); -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */ @@ -260,7 +268,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_no_input_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)else efr &= ~(UART_17158_EFR_ECB |UART_17158_EFR_IXOFF ); -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero +* it out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */ @@ -298,7 +308,9 @@ static inline void neo_set_no_output_flow_control(struct channel_t *ch)else efr &= ~(UART_17158_EFR_ECB |UART_17158_EFR_IXON ); -/* Why? Becuz Exar's spec says we have to zero it out before setting it */ +/* Why? Because Exar's spec says we have to zero it +* out before setting it +*/ writeb (0 , &ch->ch_neo_uart->efr);/* Turn on UART enhanced bits */ --2.7.4
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "outreachy-kernel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20160915040821.GA5441%40toblerone.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Greg Kroah-Hartman
maintainerQuoted 8 lines · Julia Lawall
Quoted 2 lines · Rehas Sachdeva
This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning: Line over 80 characters. Also, the word 'because' was spelled as 'Becuz' and has been corrected.
Looks much betetr :)
Julia, can you provide "Reviewed-by:" or "Acked-by:" for patches like this so that I can give you credit for doing this review?
thanks,
greg k-h
Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 4 lines · Julia Lawall
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016, Rehas Sachdeva wrote:
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning: Line over 80 characters. Also, the word 'because' was spelled as 'Becuz' and has been corrected.
Looks much betetr :)
Julia, can you provide "Reviewed-by:" or "Acked-by:" for patches like this so that I can give you credit for doing this review?
OK. Will do.
julia