[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <570D3850.4030405@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:02:56 -0700
From: Daniel Walker <danielwa@...co.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Cc: open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>,
"xe-kernel@...ernal.cisco.com" <xe-kernel@...ernal.cisco.com>
Subject: Re: checkpatch false positon on EXPORT_SYMBOL
On 04/12/2016 10:49 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Tue, 2016-04-12 at 13:59 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
>> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> []
>> @@ -3000,7 +3000,7 @@ sub process {
>>
>> $realline_next = $line_nr_next;
>> if (defined $realline_next &&
>> (!defined $lines[$realline_next - 1] ||
>> - substr($lines[$realline_next - 1], $off_next) =~ /^\s*$/)) {
>> + substr($lines[$realline_next - 1], $off_next) =~ /^($;|\s)*$/)) {
>> $realline_next++;
>> }
> This doesn't work with c99 comments like:
>
> int foo; // comment
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(foo); // comment
>
> but then again, there aren't any uses like that in the
> kernel tree so it almost certainly doesn't matter.
>
> Thanks Andy.
checkpatch.pl is used prior to sending code to a mailing list. So if
someone adds code with C99 comments then they would get false warnings.
Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists