Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: fixed the coding style, labels should not be indented.

[Alex Elder]

On 6/2/21 9:27 AM, Manikishan Ghantasala wrote:
> Sending this mail again as I missed to reply to all.
>   Hi Alex,
>
> I agree those are called bit-field member names rather than labels.
> But the reason I mentioned is because the ./scripts/checkpatch.pl
> gave out a warning saying "labels should not be indented".
>
> Sorry for the confusion in the name I referred to. So, I think this
> change is needed as I feel this is not following the coding-style by
> having indent before the width for bit field member. I went through
> other places in source code to make sure this is correct, and sent the
> patch after confirmation.

I agree that many instances in the kernel source place the width
of a C bit-field immediately after the colon.  But it is not a
universal convention, and I personally prefer the aligned widths
used by the Greybus code here.

So I don't find this patch acceptable.

					-Alex

> Regards,
> Manikishan Ghantasala
>
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 at 19:13, Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 6/2/21 8:36 AM, sh4nnu wrote:
> > > From: Manikishan Ghantasala <manikishanghantasala@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > staging: greybus: gpio.c: Clear coding-style problem
> > > "labels should not be indented" by removing indentation.
> >
> > These are not labels.
> >
> > I don't really understand what you're doing here.
> >
> > Can you please explain why you think this needs changing?
> >
> >                                          -Alex
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Manikishan Ghantasala <manikishanghantasala@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >    drivers/staging/greybus/gpio.c | 6 +++---
> > >    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/gpio.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/gpio.c
> > > index 7e6347fe93f9..4661f4a251bd 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/gpio.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/gpio.c
> > > @@ -20,9 +20,9 @@
> > >    struct gb_gpio_line {
> > >        /* The following has to be an array of line_max entries */
> > >        /* --> make them just a flags field */
> > > -     u8                      active:    1,
> > > -                             direction: 1,   /* 0 = output, 1 = input */
> > > -                             value:     1;   /* 0 = low, 1 = high */
> > > +     u8                      active:1,
> > > +                             direction:1,    /* 0 = output, 1 = input */
> > > +                             value:1;        /* 0 = low, 1 = high */
> > >        u16                     debounce_usec;
> > >
> > >        u8                      irq_type;