* CHECKPATCH: strange warning on alignment modifier
@ 2018-10-08 7:56 Igor Stoppa
2018-10-09 2:07 ` Joe Perches
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Igor Stoppa @ 2018-10-08 7:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andy Whitcroft, Joe Perches; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
Hi,
I have the following fragment of code:
+struct my_struct {
+ atomic_long_t l __aligned(sizeof(atomic_long_t));
+} __aligned(sizeof(atomic_long_t));
triggering this warning, when fed to checkpatch.pl:
WARNING: function definition argument 'atomic_long_t' should also have
an identifier name
#19: FILE: path/to/file.h
+ atomic_long_t l __aligned(sizeof(atomic_long_t));
gcc [(Ubuntu 7.3.0-16ubuntu3) 7.3.0] seems to be happy about it
I am using the HEAD from mainline.
My intent is to specify the alignment of both the field and the
structure (yes, probably redundant in this single-field case).
If I am doing something wrong, I can't figure out what it is, but I
don't understand why the WARNING is mentioning a function definition.
--
igor
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* Re: CHECKPATCH: strange warning on alignment modifier
2018-10-08 7:56 CHECKPATCH: strange warning on alignment modifier Igor Stoppa
@ 2018-10-09 2:07 ` Joe Perches
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2018-10-09 2:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Igor Stoppa, Andy Whitcroft; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Mon, 2018-10-08 at 10:56 +0300, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have the following fragment of code:
>
> +struct my_struct {
> + atomic_long_t l __aligned(sizeof(atomic_long_t));
> +} __aligned(sizeof(atomic_long_t));
>
>
> triggering this warning, when fed to checkpatch.pl:
>
> WARNING: function definition argument 'atomic_long_t' should also have
> an identifier name
> #19: FILE: path/to/file.h
> + atomic_long_t l __aligned(sizeof(atomic_long_t));
>
>
> gcc [(Ubuntu 7.3.0-16ubuntu3) 7.3.0] seems to be happy about it
>
> I am using the HEAD from mainline.
>
> My intent is to specify the alignment of both the field and the
> structure (yes, probably redundant in this single-field case).
>
> If I am doing something wrong, I can't figure out what it is, but I
> don't understand why the WARNING is mentioning a function definition.
It's a defect in checkpatch.
For now, just ignore the message.
I will work on it later.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-10-09 2:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-10-08 7:56 CHECKPATCH: strange warning on alignment modifier Igor Stoppa
2018-10-09 2:07 ` Joe Perches
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®