On Wed 2019-02-20 15:49:25, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-02-12 at 19:51 -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > On February 12, 2019 6:39:49 PM PST, tristram...@microchip.com wrote:
> > > > > +static void ksz9477_freeze_mib(struct ksz_device *dev, int port,
> > > > > + bool freeze)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct ksz_port *p = &dev->ports[port];
> > > > > + u32 val = freeze ? MIB_COUNTER_FLUSH_FREEZE : 0;
> > > >
> > > > Reverse Christmas tree.
> > >
> > > There was a checkpatch.pl patch in 2016 that tried to check this, but
> > > it was never accepted?
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/732076/
>
> While I still think use of reverse christmas tree is misguided,
> there were some disagreements about what form it really is:
Agreed about "misguided".
Often there's more logical order, like "self" pointer first... which
this patch follows.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
