| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
"unsigned" was changed to "unsigned int" because
checkpatch.pl was printing the following warning:
WARNING: Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned'
According to the C18 standard[1], "unsigned" is the same as
"unsigned int": in the "6.7 Declarations" section we have:
"- unsigned, or unsigned int" [...]
Each of the comma-separated multisets designates the same type [...]
References:
-----------
[1]The standard doesn't seem to be available for free, but the draft
can be downloaded from the following URL:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181230041359if_/http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/abq/c17_updated_proposed_fdis.pdf
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
"unsigned" was changed to "unsigned int" because
checkpatch.pl was printing the following warning:
WARNING: Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned'
According to the C18 standard[1], "unsigned" is the same as
"unsigned int": in the "6.7 Declarations" section we have:
"- unsigned, or unsigned int" [...]
Each of the comma-separated multisets designates the same type [...]
References:
-----------
[1]The standard doesn't seem to be available for free, but the draft
can be downloaded from the following URL:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181230041359if_/http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/abq/c17_updated_proposed_fdis.pdf
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
For __FUNCTION__, according to checkpatch.pl, it's gcc
specific:
WARNING: __func__ should be used instead of gcc specific __FUNCTION__
However __func__ is part of the C18 standard[1]. In the
"6.4.2.2 Predefined identifiers" section, we have:
"The identifier __func__ shall be implicitly declared by
the translator as if, immediately following the opening
brace of each function definition, the declaration
static const char __func__[] = "function-name";
"
Using symbolic permissions for file mode triggered a
checkpatch.pl warning:
WARNING: Symbolic permissions
'S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH' are not
preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0644'.
The rationale behind that is that octal is generally easier
to understand than the symbolic relresentation. For more
information, see the follwoing Linux commit:
f90774e1fd27 checkpatch: look for symbolic permissions and suggest octal instead
References:
-----------
[1]The standard doesn't seem to be available for free, but the draft
can be downloaded from the following URL:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181230041359if_/http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/abq/c17_updated_proposed_fdis.pdf
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
For __FUNCTION__, according to checkpatch.pl, it's gcc
specific:
WARNING: __func__ should be used instead of gcc specific __FUNCTION__
However __func__ is part of the C18 standard[1]. In the
"6.4.2.2 Predefined identifiers" section, we have:
"The identifier __func__ shall be implicitly declared by
the translator as if, immediately following the opening
brace of each function definition, the declaration
static const char __func__[] = "function-name";
"
References:
-----------
[1]The standard doesn't seem to be available for free, but the draft
can be downloaded from the following URL:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181230041359if_/http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/abq/c17_updated_proposed_fdis.pdf
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
For __FUNCTION__, according to checkpatch.pl, it's gcc
specific:
WARNING: __func__ should be used instead of gcc specific __FUNCTION__
However __func__ is part of the C18 standard[1]. In the
"6.4.2.2 Predefined identifiers" section, we have:
"The identifier __func__ shall be implicitly declared by
the translator as if, immediately following the opening
brace of each function definition, the declaration
static const char __func__[] = "function-name";
"
References:
-----------
[1]The standard doesn't seem to be available for free, but the draft
can be downloaded from the following URL:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181230041359if_/http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/abq/c17_updated_proposed_fdis.pdf
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
checkpatch.pl still produces warning on tools/ipc-modem.c
but there were good reasons to ignore them:
- Since there is no documentation for the samsung-ipc
protocol, beside the libsamsung-ipc source code, the
code that was commented out or between #if 0 #endif
has been preserved as it could be relevant to the
understanding of the protocol.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
- checkpatch also emits many warnings for "quoted string
split across lines". The issue here is that we have
conflicting rules in the code style.
- In one hand there is a limit of 80 characters per line.
- On the other hand, user-visible strings should not
be broken because "that breaks the ability to grep
for them"[1].
So the strings were split in a way that limit the
probability of not finding them in grep.
The assignment of the global declaration to 0 also
triggered a checkpatch.pl error:
ERROR: do not initialise globals to 0
So they were fixed as the fix shouldn't induce any
functional change: In the the C18 standard draft[2] in the
Semantics section of the Initialization section (6.7.9) we
have:
If an object that has static or thread storage
duration is not initialized explicitly, then:
[...]
- if it has arithmetic type, it is initialized to
(positive or unsigned) zero;
References:
-----------
[1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?h=v5.6#n81
[2]The standard doesn't seem to be available for free, but the draft
can be downloaded from the following URL:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181230041359if_/http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/abq/c17_updated_proposed_fdis.pdf
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This contains no functional changes.
The commented out code if any has also been preserved as it
could be relevant to the understanding of the code.
It will be kept until we understand why the code has been
commented. In that case we either need to remove it completely
or to replace it by a comment explaining why not having that
code was necessary.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This explains the policies and conventions that are already
in place.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This checks the files that aren't modified by any of the
commits that are in the revision range.
This is not completely failsafe as checkpatch.pl tend to
check better what's touched by a patch, in the case of
modifications that do not touch C code:
- Checking for scripts/spelling.txt with checkpatch.pl -f
doesn't raise any errors or warnings.
- Checking the patch that adds scripts/spelling.txt
raise a lot of warnings.
However checkpatch.pl seem to find issues in C code regardless
of whether the code is checked as part of individual files
or as part of a patch.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This adds an option to check if all the repository files
were "converted" by checking if they all have been modified
by a patch in the git revision range given.
Signed-off-by: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo@cyberdimension.org>
|