Re: [PATCH 5/6] x86: coding style fixes toarch/x86/kernel/traps_64.c
From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Thu Jul 31 2008 - 12:32:20 EST
* Gustavo F. Padovan <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> void printk_address(unsigned long address, int reliable)
> {
> - printk(" [<%016lx>] %s%pS\n", address, reliable ? "": "? ", (void *) address);
> + printk(" [<%016lx>] %s%pS\n", address, reliable ?
> + "" : "? ", (void *) address);
careful with line 80 warnings. This one is better broken up the
following way:
printk(" [<%016lx>] %s%pS\n",
address, reliable ? "": "? ", (void *) address);
so that logically coherent pieces of code stay together. (the arguments
to the printk() function call in this case)
> #if DEBUG_STKSZ > EXCEPTION_STKSZ
> - [N_EXCEPTION_STACKS ... N_EXCEPTION_STACKS + DEBUG_STKSZ / EXCEPTION_STKSZ - 2] = "#DB[?]"
> + [N_EXCEPTION_STACKS ... N_EXCEPTION_STACKS + DEBUG_STKSZ /
> + EXCEPTION_STKSZ - 2] = "#DB[?]"
this too is done better in another way:
[N_EXCEPTION_STACKS ...
N_EXCEPTION_STACKS + DEBUG_STKSZ / EXCEPTION_STKSZ - 2] = "#DB[?]"
> - // debugging aid: "show_stack(NULL, NULL);" prints the
> - // back trace for this cpu.
> + /* debugging aid: "show_stack(NULL, NULL);" prints the
> + back trace for this cpu. */
please use the standard multi-line comment format:
/*
* Multi-line ...........
* .............. comment.
*/
i've applied your patches already to x86/cleanups, so please send a
delta patch against that branch to fix these few items up. You can pick
it up via:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/tip.git/README
and do:
git-checkout tip/x86/cleanups
to check out that exact tree. (You might also want to work against
tip/master, which has the same changes.)
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/