Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] staging: vt6655: refactor long lines of code in s_uFillDataHead

[Tanju Brunostar]

On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 9:17 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 07:06:09AM +0000, Tanjuate Brunostar wrote:
> > fix checkpatch errors by refactoring long lines of code in the function: s_uFillDataHead
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tanjuate Brunostar <tanjubrunostar0@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> > index 01e72999831b..dc853b83459b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/rxtx.c
> > @@ -484,19 +484,28 @@ static __le16 s_uFillDataHead(struct vnt_private *pDevice,
> >                       } else {
> >                               /* Get Duration and TimeStamp */
> >                               buf->duration_a =
> > -                                     cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A, cbFrameLength,
> > -                                                                         byPktType, wCurrentRate, bNeedAck, uFragIdx,
> > -                                                                         cbLastFragmentSize, uMACfragNum,
> > +                                     cpu_to_le16((u16)s_uGetDataDuration(pDevice, DATADUR_A,
>
> Why is this function not returning u16 to start with?  Everywhere it is
> used it is casted.
>
> Please fix that up first, then fix up the function name itself, and then
> work on shortening these lines, as that will be much better overall.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
OK