ndation.org; j...@redhat.com; *S-Par-Maintainer
>> <sparmaintai...@unisys.com>
>> Cc: de...@driverdev.osuosl.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: unisys: fix checkpatch block comments warning
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/10/2017 06:36 PM, Kershner, David
tai...@unisys.com>
> Cc: de...@driverdev.osuosl.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: unisys: fix checkpatch block comments warning
>
>
>
> On 01/10/2017 06:36 PM, Kershner, David A wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Abdul Rauf [mailto:abdulr
rmaintai...@unisys.com>
>> Cc: de...@driverdev.osuosl.org
>> Subject: [PATCH] staging: unisys: fix checkpatch block comments warning
> This patch has the same subject line as the previous patch? Which one
> should we use? Or can you make the names unique?
>
> David Kershner
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Abdul Rauf [mailto:abdulraufmuja...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 6:24 PM
> To: gre...@linuxfoundation.org; j...@redhat.com; *S-Par-Maintainer
> <sparmaintai...@unisys.com>
> Cc: de...@driverdev.osuosl.org
> Subject: [
Fix the following warnings:
Block comments should align the * on each line
Signed-off-by: Abdul Rauf
---
drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorchipset.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorchipset.c
Fix the following warnings:
Block comments should align the * on each line
Signed-off-by: Abdul Rauf
---
drivers/staging/unisys/include/channel.h | 134 +++
1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
diff --git