[PATCH v4 01/16] drm: exynos/dp: fix code style

[Joe Perches]

On Thu, 2015-09-03 at 13:33 +0800, Yakir Yang wrote:
[]
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_dp_core.c
[]
> >>>> @@ -155,24 +156,22 @@ static int exynos_dp_read_edid(struct
> >>>> exynos_dp_device *dp)
> >>>>            }
> >>>>              exynos_dp_read_byte_from_dpcd(dp, DP_TEST_REQUEST,
> >>>> -                    &test_vector);
> >>>> +                          &test_vector);
> >>>>            if (test_vector & DP_TEST_LINK_EDID_READ) {
> >>>> -            exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp,
> >>>> -                DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM,
> >>>> +            exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(
> >>>> +                dp, DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM,
> >>>>                    edid[EDID_BLOCK_LENGTH + EDID_CHECKSUM]);
> >>>> -            exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp,
> >>>> -                DP_TEST_RESPONSE,
> >>>> +            exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(
> >>>> +                dp, DP_TEST_RESPONSE,
> >>>>                    DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM_WRITE);
> >>> To me, missing argument after opening parenthesis, looks worse. I would
> >>> prefer:
> >>>
> >>>              exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp,
> >>>
> >>> Why you moved the 'dp' argument to new line?
> >> Hmm... Just like style tool indicate, no more warning after
> >> that change.
> >>
> >> For now, I would like to follow the original style, just improved
> >> some obvious style problem.  :-)
> > What was the checkpatch warning that said 'dp' has to move to new line?
> > I tried this and I don't see it.
> 
> checkpatch haven't remind me that put dp to new line would fix
> this warning, this just come from my experiments. And I works,
> no more warnings from checkpatch, so I toke this style.

Checkpatch isn't a great arbiter of style.
It's just a brainless tool.

Always use your instead of anything brainless.

If it were code I was writing, I'd ignore 80 columns warnings
where appropriate.

These are long function names and long macro defines, so it's
inappropriate to use 80 columns as a guiding style.

I'd write:

		exynos_dp_read_byte_from_dpcd(dp, DP_TEST_REQUEST, &test_vector);
		if (test_vector & DP_TEST_LINK_EDID_READ) {
			exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp, DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM,
						     edid[EDID_BLOCK_LENGTH + EDID_CHECKSUM]);
			exynos_dp_write_byte_to_dpcd(dp, DP_TEST_RESPONSE,
						     DP_TEST_EDID_CHECKSUM_WRITE);
		}