From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755739Ab3LTJX6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Dec 2013 04:23:58 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0201.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.201]:57486 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755665Ab3LTJX4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Dec 2013 04:23:56 -0500 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1538:1568:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2559:2562:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3622:3865:3868:3870:3871:3872:3873:4250:4321:5007:6119:7652:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12517:12519:12740:13069:13095:13311:13357,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: fold95_3f0d31d7e9f18 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1560 Message-ID: <1387531432.2353.44.camel@joe-AO722> Subject: Re: checkpatch.pl error might be false positive From: Joe Perches To: Josh Triplett Cc: Ravi Patel , Jesse Brandeburg , Andy Whitcroft , Kumar Sankaran , Loc Ho , Keyur Chudgar , LKML Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 01:23:52 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20131220091621.GC21784@leaf> References: <1387491348.2353.20.camel@joe-AO722> <20131220075634.GA21784@leaf> <1387528630.2353.39.camel@joe-AO722> <20131220091621.GC21784@leaf> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 01:16 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > Duplicating the regex seems awful. Could you put it in a variable? awful is a strong word and I don't have any issue with the duplication. Using a variable is just as confusing as any duplication. Using a separate test and message for the GPL vs the FSF bits would likely be better anyway. You're the original FSF address patch submitter, fix it as you think appropriate.