From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Yash Omer <yashomer0007@gmail.com>,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net
Subject: Re: [RFC patch] checkpatch: test identifier lengths
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:05:03 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1518815103.13169.23.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180216123139.84c4efe02dc40ed333d886e7@linux-foundation.org>
On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 12:31 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 09:13:27 -0800 Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 15:55 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 05:06:34PM +0530, Yash Omer wrote:
> > > > This patch fix line should not end with open parenthesis found by checkpatch.plscript.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yash Omer <yashomer0007@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 4 ++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > > index 52054a528723..39fb737543b5 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > > @@ -383,8 +383,8 @@ static void nvec_request_master(struct work_struct *work)
> > > > msg = list_first_entry(&nvec->tx_data, struct nvec_msg, node);
> > > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&nvec->tx_lock, flags);
> > > > nvec_gpio_set_value(nvec, 0);
> > > > - err = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(
> > > > - &nvec->ec_transfer, msecs_to_jiffies(5000));
> > > > + err = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout
> > > > + (&nvec->ec_transfer, msecs_to_jiffies(5000));
> > >
> > > The original code is basically fine... It's OK to ignore checkpatch in
> > > this situation.
> >
> > Right.
>
> Yes, I'd say that checkpatch is simply wrong here. I'd prefer that a
> function call always have the opening paren hard up against the
> function name. Because I often search for "foo(" to find the callsites
> of foo() and I expect that some code-parsing tools do the same thing.
> The "(" is the application of an operator to an identifier.
>
> So I'd vote for simply nuking that checkpatch warning altogether.
> Maybe there are other situations in which it is useful, dunno.
Doubtful.
The idea was to have functions have at least 1 argument
on the same line as the function name.
Care to comment on the identifier maximum length check?
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-16 21:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-16 11:36 [PATCH] Staging: nvec: fix line should not end with a open parenthesis Yash Omer
2018-02-16 11:39 ` David Laight
2018-02-16 12:55 ` Dan Carpenter
2018-02-16 17:13 ` [RFC patch] checkpatch: test identifier lengths Joe Perches
2018-02-16 20:31 ` Andrew Morton
2018-02-16 20:44 ` Greg KH
2018-02-16 21:05 ` Joe Perches [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1518815103.13169.23.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yashomer0007@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome