Re: [PATCH] e1000 C style badness

[Patrizio Bassi <patrizio.bassi@gmail.com>]

Jens Axboe ha scritto:
> Hi,
> 
> Recent e1000 updates introduced variable declarations after code. Fix
> those up again.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
> index d0a5d16..ca68a04 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
> @@ -2142,9 +2142,11 @@ e1000_leave_82542_rst(struct e1000_adapt
>  		e1000_pci_set_mwi(&adapter->hw);
>  
>  	if(netif_running(netdev)) {
> +		struct e1000_rx_ring *ring;
> +
>  		e1000_configure_rx(adapter);
>  		/* No need to loop, because 82542 supports only 1 queue */
> -		struct e1000_rx_ring *ring = &adapter->rx_ring[0];
> +		ring = &adapter->rx_ring[0];
>  		adapter->alloc_rx_buf(adapter, ring, E1000_DESC_UNUSED(ring));
>  	}
>  }
> @@ -3583,8 +3585,8 @@ e1000_clean_rx_irq(struct e1000_adapter 
>  	rx_desc = E1000_RX_DESC(*rx_ring, i);
>  
>  	while(rx_desc->status & E1000_RXD_STAT_DD) {
> -		buffer_info = &rx_ring->buffer_info[i];
>  		u8 status;
> +		buffer_info = &rx_ring->buffer_info[i];
>  #ifdef CONFIG_E1000_NAPI
>  		if(*work_done >= work_to_do)
>  			break;
> 

Shouldn't variables declaration be on top of function and not on top of
a block (like if, while, for...)?

--
Patrizio Bassi
www.patriziobassi.it
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/