From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2D4AA0565 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:56:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6641C001; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:56:08 +0100 (CET) Received: by dpdk.org (Postfix, from userid 1017) id 55D581C00E; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:56:07 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <4099DE2E54AFAD489356C6C9161D53339729F63A@DGGEML502-MBX.china.huawei.com> References: <4099DE2E54AFAD489356C6C9161D53339729F63A@DGGEML502-MBX.china.huawei.com> To: test-report@dpdk.org Cc: Linhaifeng Message-Id: <20200310105607.55D581C00E@dpdk.org> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:56:07 +0100 (CET) From: checkpatch@dpdk.org Subject: [dpdk-test-report] |WARNING| pw66502 [PATCH v4] eal/arm64: fix rdtsc precise version X-BeenThere: test-report@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: automatic DPDK test reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: test-report-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "test-report" Test-Label: checkpatch Test-Status: WARNING http://dpdk.org/patch/66502 _coding style issues_ Must be a reply to the first patch (--in-reply-to). WARNING:LONG_LINE: line over 90 characters #117: FILE: lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_64.h:64: + uint64_t tmp, _val = (val); \ WARNING:LONG_LINE: line over 90 characters #118: FILE: lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_64.h:65: + \ WARNING:LONG_LINE: line over 90 characters #119: FILE: lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_64.h:66: + asm volatile( \ WARNING:LONG_LINE: line over 90 characters #123: FILE: lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_64.h:70: + : "=r" (tmp) : "r" (_val)); \ WARNING:NO_AUTHOR_SIGN_OFF: Missing Signed-off-by: line by nominal patch author 'Linhaifeng ' total: 0 errors, 5 warnings, 50 lines checked