On Saturday 26 February 2005 20:10, Eric Gaumer wrote:
If the code looks problematic could someone point out possible
deficiencies so we can work toward a satisfactory resolution? I didn't
write the code but I'm willing do what I have to in order to get this
(wireless scanning) into the official tree.
Uhhh... Started to comment line-by-line but then realized it would take too
much time.
* Read Documentaion/CodingStyle.
* Indent code with tabs where it is already indented with tabs.
* Brackets around a single number in #define's are useless.
* Use u8, u16, u32 (not uint*_t) where the code already uses them.
* Comments are supposed to be anonymous.
* Use appropriate KERN_* constant in printk()'s.
* Don't pack simple types (uint32_t, ...)
* Common convention is to return 0 on success, negative number on error.
Positive return values don't fit well into this scheme. If possible
follow it.
Oh, and the type p80211item_uint32_t when in fact it is a 12-bytes long
structure ...
Alexey
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature