linux-kernel - RE: two false alarms from checkpatch.pl

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1308008193.26699.60.camel@Joe-Laptop>
Date:	Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:36:33 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Jian Peng <jipeng@...adcom.com>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: two false alarms from checkpatch.pl

On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 16:28 -0700, Jian Peng wrote:
> On the other hand, 
> while (1); 
> is a style that was used universally by C programmers. Could you rethink about take this as exception in checkpatch.pl?

For some subset of C programmers... ;)

The kernel generally uses "unreachable()" instead.


--
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/