From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id C22D3A046B for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 00:37:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2351BF61; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 00:37:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0D351BF51 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 00:37:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C8E82A5; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 18:37:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 23 Jun 2019 18:37:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=vVE/N00cldAZohxb9tRMyHHLfAInrlLGssMHZzO8+Ik=; b=MfHwVvmML/bE Y8QaLhSmrtb/7PFnVJIlBASYuLLsFSCDkY2Y9v9mCnVjgtMclU6gyQR/zvOt5y8d 3N3oUukaEX+u7TATD+/5wD4/fhCMYO5rS9UbcrSTjmv0zSL6GbKt8rFUegdLY3CO c8gL25GRTnbcbJVjWjOe+ESoyGQW7mQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=vVE/N00cldAZohxb9tRMyHHLfAInrlLGssMHZzO8+ Ik=; b=KfyVC1BxDL8aXoKo0poWd4KpCcalhNZuUQHI2ONafamFwEAKdiRuhbyYf xaKOfTwdkhBGAtioaELivDKW/NUwkwp4KOo1Vfj2MR6LXLcHqb2R4wt6EaIuNcJk FvAGrJJ6ygG+SA9iYhgXELcQ4QcdTyglA24b2KJlhYOqzs/9waXGEIM8Z/anoWql 6071Xp700sp66gG2xwdSEyZ+ayYpKZlGobW+Ac5cnwxXpR6LvMDcivgJ//tRd+dQ jPfNR4OY8vaCsXrU6PjXb2RYukaLTv8JYkpWq6v1KIckKorZ2Lxx44C/T67WD6LC FZP40U8qsyBrtVw0A0CjJ2CAF53Lg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddruddugdduvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhho mhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0BEAE380076; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 18:37:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Andrew Rybchenko Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ferruh Yigit Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 00:37:22 +0200 Message-ID: <8008291.hctuhiT9KT@xps> In-Reply-To: <2b5ce1ae-0157-f1e6-6bad-eac1306675b7@intel.com> References: <1560152324-20538-1-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com> <2b5ce1ae-0157-f1e6-6bad-eac1306675b7@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/29] net/sfc/base: update base driver X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 18/06/2019 09:52, Ferruh Yigit: > On 6/10/2019 8:38 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > > checkpatches.sh generates warnings/errors because of a bit different > > coding style in base driver. [...] > Series applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks. > > Fixed following checkpatch warnings while merging: There are a lot more checkpatch warnings in this code. Is it possible to fix the style of the code in the sfc/base directory? Or we prefer to continue with so many checkpatch warnings?