Paul Menzel has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/31652 )
Change subject: getac/p470: Let clang-format handle the coding style ......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(2 comments)
Patch Set 1:
Patch Set 1:
Martin, what should we do about formatting disagreements between checkpatch and clang-format (like here)?
We'll need to fix checkpatch.
I disagree. Both objections of checkpatch.pl make sense, and clang-format should follow them, if possible.
https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/31652/1//COMMIT_MSG Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/31652/1//COMMIT_MSG@10 PS1, Line 10: Could you please add the Clang version, you used for this?
https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/31652/1/src/mainboard/getac/p470/ec_oem.h File src/mainboard/getac/p470/ec_oem.h:
https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/31652/1/src/mainboard/getac/p470/ec_oem.h@24 PS1, Line 24: // 1: SMI event pending : #define EC_SMI_EVT (1 << 6) : : // 1: SCI event pending : #define EC_SCI_EVT (1 << 5) : : // controller is in burst mode : #define EC_BURST (1 << 4) : : // 1: byte in data register is command : // 0: byte in data register is data : #define EC_CMD (1 << 3) : : // 1: input buffer full (data ready for ec) : #define EC_IBF (1 << 1) : : // 1: output buffer full (data ready for host) : #define EC_OBF (1 << 0) : : /* EC_SC output */ : #define RD_EC 0x80 // Read Embedded Controller : #define WR_EC 0x81 // Write Embedded Controller : #define BE_EC 0x82 // Burst Enable Embedded Controller : #define BD_EC 0x83 // Burst Disable Embedded Controller : #define QR_EC 0x84 // Query Embedded Controller Both blocks should follow the same formatting style. Looks like a clang-format problem.