RE: [PATCH 1/4 v3] GPIO: gpio-dwapb: Enable platform driver binding to MFD driver

[Chen, Alvin]

> 
> > >
> > > > >  static int dwapb_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)  {
> > > > > +	int i;
> > > > >  	struct resource *res;
> > > > >  	struct dwapb_gpio *gpio;
> > > > > -	struct device_node *np;
> > > > >  	int err;
> > > > > -	unsigned int offs = 0;
> > > > > +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > > > > +	struct dwapb_platform_data *pdata = dev_get_platdata(dev);
> > > > > +	bool is_pdata_alloc = !pdata;
> > > >
> > > > Please combine the int's in one line (int err, i;) and put them as
> > > > the last one on this list.  It looks the same to the compiler of
> > > > course, but more uniform for human eyes :)
> > >
> > > Do you think it's a good idea? In this case I, for example, would
> > > like to see int err as a separate line at the end of definition
> > > block. It would be better to distinguish counters and return code storage.
> > > Moreover, often counters would be unsigned int.
> >
> > If they are both 'int' they should be combined.  If 'i' is changed to
> > be an unsigned int they would be separate.
> 
> Linus, do you have any idea about it? I think it is not a big issue.
> >

Since no further feedbacks, I decide to use 'unsigned int i' to align the two feedbacks, since 'i' is just a counter.
And will send a new version with just this changes later.
--
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/