linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: extend line continuation test

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 15 Nov 2012 23:09:55 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>,
	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, peter@...leysoftware.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: extend line continuation test

On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 08:02 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > Preprocessor directives and asm statements should be
> > allowed to have a line continuation.
> 
> For preprocessor directives I agree.
> 
> But why do asm statements need it? They'r just strings, so just closing with
> a double quote at the end of the first line, and opening again with a
> double quote
> on the next line works fine.

I agree it does, but it's a pretty common existing style and
I want to avoid people submitting unnecessary "fix" patches.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/