linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/10] Staging: fbtft: Remove useless newline

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]

Message-ID: <20150630174518.GR28762@mwanda>
Date:	Tue, 30 Jun 2015 20:45:18 +0300
From:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, noralf@...nnes.org,
	Fabio Falzoi <fabio.falzoi84@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] Staging: fbtft: Remove useless newline

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 07:55:42AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 10:42 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 08:43:14AM +0200, Fabio Falzoi wrote:
> > > No newline is needed since checkpatch doesn't complain about line longer
> > > than 80 characters for string literals.
> []
> > The original was correct.
> 
> The original was fine.
> 
> > There was no need to go over 80 characters
> > just because of a limitation in checkpatch.
> 
> How is checkpatch not emitting a message on
> either form a limitation?

It's not an easily solvable limitation, but the original was better than
the new patch.  This patch is all like "I've found a way to do something
bad and checkpatch.pl doesn't catch it so woohoo!"

regards,
dan carpenter

--
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/