On Mon, 2014-01-27 at 19:26 +0400, Alexey Charkov wrote:
> 2014/1/27 Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>:
> > On Mon, 2014-01-27 at 15:51 +0400, Alexey Charkov wrote:
[...]
> >> @@ -1094,20 +1094,22 @@ static int alloc_ring(struct net_device* dev)
> >>       void *ring;
> >>       dma_addr_t ring_dma;
> >>
> >> -     ring = pci_alloc_consistent(rp->pdev,
> >> +     ring = dma_alloc_coherent(&rp->pdev->dev,
> >>                                   RX_RING_SIZE * sizeof(struct rx_desc) +
> >>                                   TX_RING_SIZE * sizeof(struct tx_desc),
> >> -                                 &ring_dma);
> >> +                                 &ring_dma,
> >> +                                     GFP_ATOMIC);
> > [...]
> >
> > Indentation is messed up here (and in several other function calls
> > you're changing).  You should align the function arguments so each line
> > begins in the column after the opening parenthesis.
> 
> Ben, thanks for pointing out. I actually just tried to follow the
> style of surrounding code, but happy to adjust if that's the preferred
> option. From what I can see, these lines should still fit in below 80
> cols even with increased indents...
> 
> Should we then also adjust other function calls within the driver with
> similar indentation (if any), that are currently not touched by this
> patch series?

There is no need to do that at the same time, but it would be a nice bit
of cleanup.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
If at first you don't succeed, you're doing about average.