staging: nvec: fix block comment style in nvec.c
Subsystems (3)
PATCH 1/1 staging: nvec: fix block comment style in nvec.c
Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
--- drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +4 -3
@@ -646,7 +646,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev) nvec->state =2 ; }break ; -case 2 :/* first byte after command */ +case 2 :/* First byte after command */ if (status == (I2C_SL_IRQ |RNW |RCVD )) {if (nvec->rx->data[0 ] !=0x01 ) { dev_err(nvec->dev,
@@ -659,8 +659,9 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)nvec_tx_set (nvec); to_send = nvec->tx->data[0 ]; nvec->tx->pos =1 ; -/* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug -do not replace by usleep_range */ +/* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug +* do not replace by usleep_range +*/ udelay (33 ); }else if (status == (I2C_SL_IRQ )) { nvec->rx->data[1 ] = received;
Signature · 1 line
2.43.0
Greg KH
maintainerQuoted 13 lines · Oskar Ray-Frayssinet
Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
Signed-off-by Oskar Ray-Frayssinet <[email protected]>--- drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +0
-0
drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev) · line 649
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +1
-1@@ -646,7 +646,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev) nvec->state =2 ; }break ; -case 2 :/* first byte after command */ +case 2 :/* First byte after command */
THis change is not what you document above as being changed :(
PATCH v3 1/1 staging: nvec: fix block comment style in nvec.c
Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
--- drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +1 -1
@@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)nvec_tx_set (nvec); to_send = nvec->tx->data[0 ]; nvec->tx->pos =1 ; -/* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug +/* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug * do not replace by usleep_range */ udelay (33 );
Signature · 1 line
2.43.0
Greg KH
maintainerQuoted 25 lines · Oskar Ray-Frayssinet
Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
Signed-off-by Oskar Ray-Frayssinet <[email protected]>--- drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +1
-1@@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)nvec_tx_set (nvec); to_send = nvec->tx->data[0 ]; nvec->tx->pos =1 ; -/* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug +/* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug * do not replace by usleep_range */ udelay (33 );Signature · 1 line
2.43.0
This change is not what you documented is changing :(
Quoted 1 line · Greg Kroah-Hartman
This change is not what you documented is changing :(
You are right, I apologize. The commit message was incorrect. The actual change was reverting an accidental capitalization introduced in v1. I will drop this patch.
Best regards,
Oskar Ray-Frayssinet
Thierry Reding
maintainerQuoted 20 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 19 lines · Oskar Ray-Frayssinet
Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
Signed-off-by Oskar Ray-Frayssinet <[email protected]>--- drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +1
-1@@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)nvec_tx_set (nvec); to_send = nvec->tx->data[0 ]; nvec->tx->pos =1 ; -/* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug +/* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug * do not replace by usleep_range
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +0
-0*/ udelay (33 );Signature · 1 line
2.43.0This change is not what you documented is changing :(
Hm... this is the 8th version of this patch that I've seen.
I don't know why there was a flurry of these. The checkpatch warning certainly isn't new, so maybe this was a new wave of janitors or something? Or maybe people using AI agents to get into kernel development. Not that it matters much, but it's not a pattern that I've seen before.
Also, the fact that 7 out of the 8 versions came in after the first had already landed in linux-next:
29e79c66b3cc ("staging: nvec: fix block comment style in nvec_interrupt()")
suggests that people aren't using linux-next as their baseline. Do we need to be stricter in this regard? Seems a bit wasteful for you to have to spend so much time looking at duplicates, even though it seems like your automation did a lot of the work.
Thierry
Greg KH
maintainerQuoted 41 lines · Thierry Reding
Quoted 20 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 19 lines · Oskar Ray-Frayssinet
Fix block comment formatting to use * on subsequent lines and */ on a separate line as required by kernel coding style.
Signed-off-by Oskar Ray-Frayssinet <[email protected]>--- drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +1
-1@@ -659,7 +659,7 @@ static irqreturn_t nvec_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)nvec_tx_set (nvec); to_send = nvec->tx->data[0 ]; nvec->tx->pos =1 ; -/* Delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug +/* delay ACK due to AP20 HW Bug * do not replace by usleep_range Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c +0
-0*/ udelay (33 );Signature · 1 line
2.43.0This change is not what you documented is changing :(
Hm... this is the 8th version of this patch that I've seen.
I don't know why there was a flurry of these. The checkpatch warning certainly isn't new, so maybe this was a new wave of janitors or something? Or maybe people using AI agents to get into kernel development. Not that it matters much, but it's not a pattern that I've seen before.
Also, the fact that 7 out of the 8 versions came in after the first had already landed in linux-next:
Quoted 6 lines
29e79c66b3cc("staging: nvec: fix block comment style innvec_interrupt()")suggests that people aren't using linux-next as their baseline. Do we need to be stricter in this regard? Seems a bit wasteful for you to have to spend so much time looking at duplicates, even though it seems like your automation did a lot of the work.
It's easy for me to reject things that obviously do not apply :)
thanks,
greg k-h