From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751676AbaCaU4d (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:56:33 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:49166 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751616AbaCaU4a (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:56:30 -0400 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:56:28 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Joe Perches Cc: Dan Carpenter , Rocco Folino , aaro.koskinen@iki.fi, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft Subject: Re: [RFC] quiet checkpatch style recommendation about no spaces around bitfield : Message-Id: <20140331135628.d8eb8bea432d509835710202@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1396279898.21529.39.camel@joe-AO722> References: <1396269280-32665-1-git-send-email-lordzen87@gmail.com> <20140331150638.GQ6991@mwanda> <1396279898.21529.39.camel@joe-AO722> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.2.0beta5 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:31:38 -0700 Joe Perches wrote: > > > @@ -143,13 +143,13 @@ union cvmx_usbcx_gahbcfg { > > > * * 1'b1: Unmask the interrupt assertion to the application. > > > */ > > > struct cvmx_usbcx_gahbcfg_s { > > > - uint32_t reserved_9_31 : 23; > > > - uint32_t ptxfemplvl : 1; > > > - uint32_t nptxfemplvl : 1; > > > - uint32_t reserved_6_6 : 1; > > > - uint32_t dmaen : 1; > > > - uint32_t hbstlen : 4; > > > - uint32_t glblintrmsk : 1; > > > + uint32_t reserved_9_31:23; > > > + uint32_t ptxfemplvl:1; > > > + uint32_t nptxfemplvl:1; > > > + uint32_t reserved_6_6:1; > > > + uint32_t dmaen:1; > > > + uint32_t hbstlen:4; > > > + uint32_t glblintrmsk:1; > > > } s; > > The warning here is: > > ERROR: spaces prohibited around that ':' (ctx:WxW) > > I have done a kernel wide search for these warnings > > Really? How? > > > and I think we > > should disable this warning. It has too many false positives like this. > > It does seem a bit noisy to me too. > > Andy? Andrew? I suspect we don't use bitfields enough for a particular style to have emerged. Personally I think the above patch made the code harder to read, so...