diff mbox series

badblocks: Prefer unsigned int over unsigned

Message ID 20190224141952.GA3653@bharath12345-Inspiron-5559 (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series badblocks: Prefer unsigned int over unsigned | expand

Commit Message

Bharath Vedartham Feb. 24, 2019, 2:19 p.m. UTC
Replace unsigned with unsigned int to improve readability.

Signed-off-by: Bharath Vedartham <linux.bhar@gmail.com>
---
 block/badblocks.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Jens Axboe Feb. 24, 2019, 3:15 p.m. UTC | #1
On 2/24/19 7:19 AM, Bharath Vedartham wrote:
> Replace unsigned with unsigned int to improve readability.

Frivolous change, would make a lot more sense to get checkpatch
to stop complaining about this.
Bharath Vedartham Feb. 24, 2019, 3:37 p.m. UTC | #2
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 08:15:30AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2/24/19 7:19 AM, Bharath Vedartham wrote:
> > Replace unsigned with unsigned int to improve readability.
> 
> Frivolous change, would make a lot more sense to get checkpatch
> to stop complaining about this.
> 
> -- 
> Jens Axboe
>
I understand. I am starting out kernel hacking. I have been working on
fixing checkpatch.pl warnings. If you have any tasks for me in the
kernel, it would be great.

I have also noticed a lot of warnings to replace printk with subsystem
specific warning functions. Is that a valuable change?

Bharath
Richard Weinberger Feb. 24, 2019, 3:50 p.m. UTC | #3
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 4:38 PM Bharath Vedartham <linux.bhar@gmail.com> wrote:
> I understand. I am starting out kernel hacking. I have been working on
> fixing checkpatch.pl warnings. If you have any tasks for me in the
> kernel, it would be great.
>
> I have also noticed a lot of warnings to replace printk with subsystem
> specific warning functions. Is that a valuable change?

This is a very good start:
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/2017-April/017765.html

Happy hacking and welcome! :-)
Bharath Vedartham Feb. 25, 2019, 5:03 p.m. UTC | #4
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 04:50:51PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 4:38 PM Bharath Vedartham <linux.bhar@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I understand. I am starting out kernel hacking. I have been working on
> > fixing checkpatch.pl warnings. If you have any tasks for me in the
> > kernel, it would be great.
> >
> > I have also noticed a lot of warnings to replace printk with subsystem
> > specific warning functions. Is that a valuable change?
> 
> This is a very good start:
> https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/2017-April/017765.html
> 
> Happy hacking and welcome! :-)
> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> //richard

Hey! Thanks for the link Richard! I have read it and clearly understood
the message. I will work on understanding the kernel and writing my own
code for my own personal learning before jumping into tasks! Thanks for
your time!

Bharath
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/block/badblocks.c b/block/badblocks.c
index 91f7bcf..e3f90c9 100644
--- a/block/badblocks.c
+++ b/block/badblocks.c
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@  int badblocks_check(struct badblocks *bb, sector_t s, int sectors,
 	u64 *p = bb->page;
 	int rv;
 	sector_t target = s + sectors;
-	unsigned seq;
+	unsigned int seq;
 
 	if (bb->shift > 0) {
 		/* round the start down, and the end up */