From d397712bcc6a759a560fd247e6053ecae091f958 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chris Mason Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:25:51 -0500 Subject: Btrfs: Fix checkpatch.pl warnings There were many, most are fixed now. struct-funcs.c generates some warnings but these are bogus. Signed-off-by: Chris Mason --- fs/btrfs/locking.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'fs/btrfs/locking.c') diff --git a/fs/btrfs/locking.c b/fs/btrfs/locking.c index e30aa6e2958..39bae7761db 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/locking.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/locking.c @@ -31,9 +31,10 @@ * difference in almost every workload, but spinning for the right amount of * time needs some help. * - * In general, we want to spin as long as the lock holder is doing btree searches, - * and we should give up if they are in more expensive code. + * In general, we want to spin as long as the lock holder is doing btree + * searches, and we should give up if they are in more expensive code. */ + int btrfs_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb) { int i; -- cgit v1.2.3