[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0704280956190.506@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 10:01:00 +0200 (MEST)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: checkpatch, a patch checking script.
On Apr 27 2007 22:58, Roland Dreier wrote:
>
>--- checkpatch.pl.orig 2007-04-27 20:30:34.000000000 -0700
>+++ checkpatch.pl 2007-04-27 22:54:42.000000000 -0700
>@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@
> $warnings += search(qr/kernel_thread\(/, "Use kthread abstraction instead of kernel_thread()\n");
> $warnings += search(qr/typedef/, "Do not add new typedefs.\n");
> $warnings += search(qr/uint32_t/, "Incorrect type usage for kernel code. Use __u32 etc.\n");
>- $warnings += search(qr/BUG(_ON)\(/, "Use WARN_ON & Recovery code rather than BUG() and BUG_ON()\n");
>+ $warnings += search(qr/(?<!BUILD_)BUG(_ON)\(/, "Use WARN_ON & Recovery code rather than BUG() and BUG_ON()\n");
I wonder what the capture is for?
(?<!BUILD_)BUG(?:_ON) if you ask me :)
But you could also use...
qr/\bBUG_ON\(/
which rules out a BUILD_BUG_ON, because _ does not constitute a word
boundary, since _ is in \w.
And since when is uint32_t wrong? What makes u32 or __u32 better?
We have sprintf, (k)asprintf, abs(), etc. etc. etc. tons of functions
named similar to their ISO C counterparts, but when it comes to types,
we make an exception?
Jan
--
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists