Hi Luca,

> Il 19/04/2011 16:18, Detlev Zundel ha scritto:
>> Hi Luca,
>>
>>> With the upcoming TFTP server implementation, the remote node can be
>>> either a client or a server, so avoid ambiguities.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli<luca.ceres...@comelit.it>
>>> Cc: Wolfgang Denk<w...@denx.de>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v2:
>>>   - fixed checkpatch issues.
>>>
>>>   net/tftp.c |   42 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>>   1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/tftp.c b/net/tftp.c
>>> index 00abec3..da545c6 100644
>>> --- a/net/tftp.c
>>> +++ b/net/tftp.c
>>> @@ -55,18 +55,18 @@ enum {
>>>     TFTP_ERR_FILE_ALREADY_EXISTS = 6,
>>>   };
>>>
>>> -static IPaddr_t TftpServerIP;
>>> -static int TftpServerPort;         /* The UDP port at their end            
>>> */
>>> -static int TftpOurPort;            /* The UDP port at our end              
>>> */
>>> +static IPaddr_t TftpRemoteIP;
>>> +static int TftpRemotePort; /* The UDP port at their end            */
>>> +static int TftpOurPort;    /* The UDP port at our end              */
>>>   static int        TftpTimeoutCount;
>>> -static ulong       TftpBlock;              /* packet sequence number       
>>>         */
>>> -static ulong       TftpLastBlock;          /* last packet sequence number 
>>> received */
>>> -static ulong       TftpBlockWrap;          /* count of sequence number 
>>> wraparounds */
>>> -static ulong       TftpBlockWrapOffset;    /* memory offset due to 
>>> wrapping        */
>>> +static ulong       TftpBlock;      /* packet sequence number               
>>> */
>>> +static ulong       TftpLastBlock;  /* last packet sequence number received 
>>> */
>>> +static ulong       TftpBlockWrap;  /* count of sequence number wraparounds 
>>> */
>>> +static ulong       TftpBlockWrapOffset; /* memory offset due to wrapping   
>>> */
>> These changes are indentation only changes, so they should be in a
>> separate patch.
>
> It's needed for checkpatch compliance.

I'm trying to understand the problems involved, but looking at this
again, it is not clear to me what you say here.  When I run your version
1 of the patches (where you only do the rename) through checkpatch, I
get:

  WARNING: line over 80 characters
  #116: FILE: net/tftp.c:59:
  +static int   TftpRemotePort;         /* The UDP port at their end            
*/
  
  WARNING: consider using kstrto* in preference to simple_strtol
  #215: FILE: net/tftp.c:619:
  +             TftpRemotePort = simple_strtol(ep, NULL, 10);
  
  total: 0 errors, 2 warnings, 99 lines checked
  
  /home/dzu/transfer/p2 has style problems, please review.  If any of these 
errors
  are false positives report them to the maintainer, see
  CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.

So I'm not sure why you say that the other changes are needed for
checkpatch.  What exactly do you mean by this?

Thanks
  Detlev

-- 
C hasn't changed much since the 1970s. And let's face it it's ugly.
Can't we do better? C++? (Sorry, never mind.)
                                    -- Rob Pike
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich,  Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: d...@denx.de
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to