[PATCH 1/9] staging: unisys: clean up periodic_work.c and periodic_work.h

[Dan Carpenter]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 11:53:53AM -0500, Romer, Benjamin M wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 19:34 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:56:19AM -0400, Benjamin Romer wrote:
> > > +struct periodic_work *
> > > +	visor_periodic_work_create(ulong jiffy_interval,
> > > +				   struct workqueue_struct *workqueue,
> > > +				   void (*workfunc)(void *),
> > > +				   void *workfuncarg,
> > > +				   const char *devnam);
> > 
> > No.  This isn't the right way to do it.  The way the lines were broken
> > up originally was fine.  It's ok to pull the parameter declarations back
> > to make it under the 80 character limit.
> 
> Sorry, it was kind of an act of desperation to try and pass the strict
> check for parenthesis alignment. I originally wanted to do it like this:
> 
> struct periodic_work *visor_periodic_work_create(ulong jiffy_interval,
> 			struct workqueue_struct *workqueue,
> 			void (*workfunc)(void*), void *workfuncarg,
> 			const char *devnam);

That looks like an inpenetrable wall of text.  I feel like it looks
better to push the parameters in further.

struct periodic_work *visor_periodic_work_create(ulong jiffy_interval,
 					struct workqueue_struct *workqueue,
 					void (*workfunc)(void*),
					void *workfuncarg,
 					const char *devnam);

But it doesn't really matter.  Sometimes none of the options look
wonderful.  But the other format was just sort of unique and weird.

> 
> But that generates the same parenthesis check message with --strict
> turned on. Trying to align everything with the parenthesis was very
> ugly, so I tried to save space by splitting the line at the return type.
> 
> So should I just ignore the parenthesis warning for this one function?

Yes.  Ignore anything if you think it looks better that way.

> I'm kind of confused about this particular check to be honest. In
> Documentation/CodingStyle it says to never use spaces for indentation,
> but there's no way to pass this check without using spaces, or getting
> lucky and having things line up exactly on a tab.

You can use spaces at the end to make things line up.  This has become
the standard in the past few years.

regards,
dan carpenter