Re: [PATCH] staging: sm750: Rename camel case functions in sm750_cursor.*

[Julia Lawall]

On Sat, 11 Mar 2023, Kloudifold wrote:

>
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2023 at 05:39, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > You don't need the filename in the subject.
> >
> > On Sat, 11 Mar 2023, Kloudifold wrote:
> >
> > > This patch fixes the "CHECK: Avoid CamelCase" reported by
> > > checkpatch.pl by renaming camel case functions.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Kloudifold <cloudifold.3125@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_cursor.c | 14 +++++++-------
> > >  drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_cursor.h | 12 ++++++------
> > >  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_cursor.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_cursor.c
> > > index 43e6f52c2..ff643e33f 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_cursor.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750_cursor.c
> > > @@ -58,13 +58,13 @@ void sm750_hw_cursor_disable(struct lynx_cursor *cursor)
> > >       poke32(HWC_ADDRESS, 0);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -void sm750_hw_cursor_setSize(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, int w, int h)
> > > +void sm750_hw_cursor_set_size(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, int w, int h)
> > >  {
> > >       cursor->w = w;
> > >       cursor->h = h;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -void sm750_hw_cursor_setPos(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, int x, int y)
> > > +void sm750_hw_cursor_set_pos(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, int x, int y)
> > >  {
> > >       u32 reg;
> > >
> > > @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ void sm750_hw_cursor_setPos(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, int x, int y)
> > >       poke32(HWC_LOCATION, reg);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -void sm750_hw_cursor_setColor(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, u32 fg, u32 bg)
> > > +void sm750_hw_cursor_set_color(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, u32 fg, u32 bg)
> > >  {
> > >       u32 reg = (fg << HWC_COLOR_12_2_RGB565_SHIFT) &
> > >               HWC_COLOR_12_2_RGB565_MASK;
> > > @@ -82,8 +82,8 @@ void sm750_hw_cursor_setColor(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, u32 fg, u32 bg)
> > >       poke32(HWC_COLOR_3, 0xffe0);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > -void sm750_hw_cursor_setData(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, u16 rop,
> > > -                          const u8 *pcol, const u8 *pmsk)
> > > +void sm750_hw_cursor_set_data(struct lynx_cursor *cursor, u16 rop,
> > > +                           const u8 *pcol, const u8 *pmsk)
> >
> > The indentation of the second line looks random.  It's not a multiple of
> > the tabs, and it doesn't line up with the right side of the (.  So there
> > doesn't seem to be any need to change it for this patch.
> >
>
> Acturally, if you set tabs be 8 characters as it said in Linux kernel coding
> style, it lines up with the right side of the (.
>
> The checkpatch.pl didn't say "CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis".
>
> It shows up didn't line up the ( may because tabs are 4 characters in
> mails.

OK, I see, thanks.  I think it is the + or - at the beginning of the line
that causes patches to look odd in this respect sometimes.

> So, should I just change the subject of the email? If I want to resend this patch,
> should I make it a reply to this current discussion string or something else?

v2.  See the tutorial.

julia