On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 08:00:36PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 17:44 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 11:31:42AM -0500, Maksymilian Piechota wrote:
> > > This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning:
> > >
> > > WARNING: Statements should start on a tabstop
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Maksymilian Piechota <maksymilianpiech...@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2mgmt.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2mgmt.c
> > > b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2mgmt.c
> > > index 16fb2d3..2d67125 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2mgmt.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/prism2mgmt.c
> > > @@ -1308,7 +1308,7 @@ int prism2mgmt_wlansniff(struct wlandevice
> > > *wlandev, void *msgp)
> > > hw->sniffhdr = 0;
> > > wlandev->netdev->type = ARPHRD_IEEE80211_PRISM;
> > > } else
> > > - if ((msg->wlanheader.status ==
> > > + if ((msg->wlanheader.status ==
> > > P80211ENUM_msgitem_status_data_ok)
> > > && (msg->wlanheader.data == P80211ENUM_truth_true)) {
> > > hw->sniffhdr = 1;
> >
> > Hm, this all doesn't look correct now, does it? Please fix up the whole
> > if statement here.
>
> Ideally, it'd look something like:
>
> /* Set the driver state */
> /* Do we want the prism2 header? */
> if (msg->prismheader.status ==
> P80211ENUM_msgitem_status_data_ok &&
> msg->prismheader.data == P80211ENUM_truth_true) {
> hw->sniffhdr = 0;
> wlandev->netdev->type = ARPHRD_IEEE80211_PRISM;
> } else if (msg->wlanheader.status ==
> P80211ENUM_msgitem_status_data_ok &&
> msg->wlanheader.data == P80211ENUM_truth_true) {
> hw->sniffhdr = 1;
> wlandev->netdev->type = ARPHRD_IEEE80211_PRISM;
> } else {
> wlandev->netdev->type = ARPHRD_IEEE80211;
> }
>
> with the unnecessary parentheses removed,
> the logical continuations at the end-of-line,
> and the else if on a single line.
>
I must admit it looks better, but this way we get 2 warnings instead of
1 (before my changes). What is the policy? Can we ignore more warnings
in order to get cleaner code?
