ac100 team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: [PATCH] Warning that occured while compiling the nvec in3.19.0-rc5+ is fixed
Am Samstag 31 Januar 2015, 20:11:29 schrieb Julian Andres Klode:
> On 31 January 2015 at 17:29, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 05:24:42PM +0530, varsharamt wrote:
> >> The task was to fix a warning which was shown while compiling a driver
> >> called NVEC. I wrote a brief description about how to enable support for
> >> a nVidya complaint embedded controller.
> > This makes no sense, what "task"?
> >> Signed-off-by:Varsha Ram T<varsharamt91@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Please use proper spaces.
> > Also, this doesn't match your From: line. And, is this the name you use
> > to sign legal documents?
> >> ---
> >> drivers/staging/nvec/Kconfig | 20 ++++++++++----------
> >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/nvec/Kconfig b/drivers/staging/nvec/Kconfig
> >> index 9475e20..a65ad4c 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/staging/nvec/Kconfig
> >> +++ b/drivers/staging/nvec/Kconfig
> >> @@ -3,33 +3,33 @@ config MFD_NVEC
> >> depends on I2C && GPIOLIB && ARCH_TEGRA
> >> select MFD_CORE
> >> help
> >> - Say Y here to enable support for a nVidia compliant embedded
> >> - controller.
> >> + Say Y to enable support for a nVidia complaint embedded controller.
> >> + nVidia complaint embedded controller is used to communicate with
> >> EC.
> >> + This is done through I2C bus.
> >> + The request to the EC can be initiated by triggering a gpio line.
> >> + The gpio line is a generic pin on integrated circuit whose input or
> >> output pin can be controlled by the user at run time.>
> > There's no way this is correct, look at how long your line is.
> I'm not even sure if this level of detail is needed. Why should anyone
> that reads the config option care how NVEC is enabled or communicated
I didn't received the original mail, but I think this is related to a
checkpatch warning which demands at least *three* lines of help text (we only
have two). While the sense of such requirement is discussable, blowing up
an already complete help text just to avoid a checkpatch warning doesn't make
much sense to me.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.