[PATCH] score/arm: style fixes

[Gedare Bloom]

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 4:48 PM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
>
> I may have missed something. Commented in one place.
>
> It looks like mostly spaces inside () and variable/parameter declaration changes.
>
Yes, for the most part those are the least consistent so far.

> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 4:38 PM Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:
>> diff --git a/cpukit/score/cpu/arm/armv7m-isr-dispatch.c b/cpukit/score/cpu/arm/armv7m-isr-dispatch.c
>> index ea168969ba..dfc125d545 100644
>> --- a/cpukit/score/cpu/arm/armv7m-isr-dispatch.c
>> +++ b/cpukit/score/cpu/arm/armv7m-isr-dispatch.c
>> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@
>>
>>  #ifdef ARM_MULTILIB_ARCH_V7M
>>
>> -static void __attribute__((naked)) _ARMV7M_Thread_dispatch( void )
>> +static void __attribute__((naked)) _ARMV7M_Thread_dispatch(void)
>>  {
>>    __asm__ volatile (
>>      "bl _Thread_Dispatch\n"
>> @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static void __attribute__((naked)) _ARMV7M_Thread_dispatch( void )
>>    );
>>  }
>>
>> -static void _ARMV7M_Trigger_lazy_floating_point_context_save( void )
>> +static void _ARMV7M_Trigger_lazy_floating_point_context_save(void)
>>  {
>>  #ifdef ARM_MULTILIB_VFP
>>    __asm__ volatile (
>> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ static void _ARMV7M_Trigger_lazy_floating_point_context_save( void )
>>  #endif
>>  }
>>
>> -void _ARMV7M_Pendable_service_call( void )
>> +void _ARMV7M_Pendable_service_call(void)
>>  {
>>    Per_CPU_Control *cpu_self = _Per_CPU_Get();
>>
>> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ void _ARMV7M_Pendable_service_call( void )
>>     * this interrupt service may be delayed until interrupts are enable again.
>>     */
>>    if (
>> -    ( cpu_self->isr_nest_level | cpu_self->thread_dispatch_disable_level ) == 0
>> +    (cpu_self->isr_nest_level | cpu_self->thread_dispatch_disable_level) == 0
>>    ) {
>
>
> Does this fit on a single line?
>
No. it's like two characters short. In fact, i had to do this one
manually. otherwise, it breaks as
if ( (...
    ) == 0 ) {

> Ignoring the fact it is using bitwise operations on two integer counters. Perhaps
> it should be a +?
>
separate problem I suppose. That is a little bit of a suspicious bit of logic.