[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090127081954.47609e46@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:19:54 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: apw@...onical.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Checkpatch false positive?
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:49:05 +0100
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've used checkpatch.pl to verify one of my patches. It complains:
>
> ERROR: trailing statements should be on next line
> #167: FILE: fs/quota/quota_tree.c:249:
> + for (i = 0, ddquot = buf + sizeof(struct qt_disk_dqdbheader);
> [...]
> i++, ddquot += info->dqi_entry_size);
>
> But the code looks like:
> for (i = 0, ddquot = buf + sizeof(struct qt_disk_dqdbheader);
> i < qtree_dqstr_in_blk(info)
> && !qtree_entry_unused(info, ddquot); i++, ddquot +=
> info->dqi_entry_size);
>
while tihs might be correct C... don't you think it would be much
better to actually have a statement here rather than cramming
everything into the for ?
--
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