[PATCH] Documentation: checkpatch: MISORDERED_TYPE table intersection fixup

[Bagas Sanjaya]

Sphinx reported error and warnings pointed at MISORDERED_TYPE table:

Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst:1393: (SEVERE/4) Unexpected section title or transition.
Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst:1393: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst:1393: WARNING: Unexpected section title or transition.

Fix these above by marking cell intersections with plus (+) sign.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/202208030829.xj2bvI7P-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst | 24 ++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
index 78abcadb522824..a9d27913e6c46f 100644
--- a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
+++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
@@ -1371,30 +1371,30 @@ Others
 
     +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     |                       Types                      |   Recommended Way  |
-    +=======================================================================+
+    +==================================================+====================+
     | char                                             | char               |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | signed char                                      | signed char        |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | unsigned char                                    | unsigned char      |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | signed, int, signed int                          | int                |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | unsigned, unsigned int                           | unsigned int       |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | short, signed short, short int, signed short int | short              |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | unsigned short, unsigned short int               | unsigned short     |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | long, signed long, long int, signed long int     | long               |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | unsigned long, unsigned long int                 | unsigned long      |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | long long, signed long long, long long int,      | long long          |
     | signed long long int                             |                    |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
     | unsigned long long, unsigned long long int       | unsigned long long |
-    +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+    +--------------------------------------------------+--------------------+
 
   **NOT_UNIFIED_DIFF**
     The patch file does not appear to be in unified-diff format.  Please
---- >8 ----

> +    Also, do not change the code if there is only a single return statement
> +    inside if-else block, like::
> +
> +      if (a > b)
> +              return a;
> +      else
> +              return b;
> +
> +    now if the else statement is removed::
> +
> +      if (a > b)
> +              return a;
> +      return b;
> +
> +    there is no considerable increase in the readability and one can argue
> +    that the first form is more readable because of the indentation. So
> +    do not remove the else statement in case of a single return statement
> +    inside the if-else block.
> +

So the first indentation above is more readable for it's clear that
b is returned if the condition is false (in this case, a < b), right?

> +    See: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20140925032215.GK7996@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> +
> +  **UNNECESSARY_INT**
> +    On Sun, 2018-08-05 at 08:52 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> +    > "long unsigned int" isn't _technically_ wrong. But we normally
> +    > call that type "unsigned long".
> +

IMO, the mail quote above can be deleted.

Thanks.

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara