From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752298AbdDHQHf (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Sat, 8 Apr 2017 12:07:35 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:35358 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751626AbdDHQH3 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sat, 8 Apr 2017 12:07:29 -0400
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2017 17:07:17 +0100
From: Alfonso Lima <alfonsolimaastor@gmail.com>
To: apw@canonical.com, joe@perches.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [bug report] checkpatch: if statement does not need to be enclosed
 in parentheses
Message-ID: <20170408160717.GA7337@alima-W65-67SF>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi,

In current linux-next, if you run the script on this piece of
code:

#define FOO(a)				\
	if (a) {			\
		something();		\
		something_else();	\
	}

You should get:

ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses
#1: FILE: foo.c:1:
+#define FOO(a)				\
+	if (a) {			\
+		something();		\
+		something_else();	\
+	}

We could silence checkpatch.pl using "do {} while ()" around the
if statement. However, the "if () {}" statement should be
enough. If someone could confirm this, I'll go and fix it.

Thanks,
Alfonso