Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] soc: mediatek: pwrap: fixup warnings from coding style

[Joe Perches]

On Wed, 2017-07-19 at 00:26 +0800, Yingjoe Chen wrote:
> [Resend due to bad mail format, sorry about the noise if you got two]
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 17:49 +0800, sean.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > fixup those warnings such as lines over 80 words and parenthesis
> > alignment which would be complained by checkpatch.pl.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 20 +++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
> > index 142f40a..5f1036f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
> > @@ -1057,7 +1057,8 @@ static int pwrap_init_cipher(struct pmic_wrapper *wrp)
> >  	/* wait for cipher data ready@PMIC */
> >  	ret = pwrap_wait_for_state(wrp, pwrap_is_pmic_cipher_ready);
> >  	if (ret) {
> > -		dev_err(wrp->dev, "timeout waiting for cipher data ready@PMIC\n");
> > +		dev_err(wrp->dev,
> > +			"timeout waiting for cipher data ready@PMIC\n");
> 
> Sean,
> 
> I think the old code is easier to read. When the line is only slightly
> over the 80 chars limit, some maintainers will even ask to keep it in
> one line to make it easier to read.
> 
> So if it is OK with Matthias, I think we should just keep it as is.

checkpatch doesn't complain about this line.