From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753892AbZFEUU4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jun 2009 16:20:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751247AbZFEUUt (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jun 2009 16:20:49 -0400 Received: from astoria.ccjclearline.com ([64.235.106.9]:40801 "EHLO astoria.ccjclearline.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751018AbZFEUUs (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jun 2009 16:20:48 -0400 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 16:17:52 -0400 (EDT) From: "Robert P. J. Day" X-X-Sender: rpjday@localhost.localdomain To: Russell King cc: Sam Ravnborg , Jaswinder Singh Rajput , Ingo Molnar , Catalin Marinas , Andrew Morton , LKML , linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] headers_check fix: arm, hwcap.h In-Reply-To: <20090605201001.GA17085@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: References: <1244118232.5172.26.camel@ht.satnam> <1244118476.5172.29.camel@ht.satnam> <20090604125306.GC24491@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090604201649.GC13892@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20090605201001.GA17085@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - astoria.ccjclearline.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - crashcourse.ca X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Russell King wrote: > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 10:16:49PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 01:53:07PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 05:57:56PM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote: > > > > fix the following 'make headers_check' warning: > > > > > > I think headers_check needs fixing - there's nothing wrong with the > > > code as it presently stands except the tools obviously can't properly > > > parse C preprocessor statements. > > > > You are correct that headers_ceck is limited here and this patch > > take some valid code and refactor it to make it headers_check compatible. > > If it is just a matter of unifdef not doing the right thing, then > that's a bug in unifdef - looking at the code, it _should_ handle > the case as it's currently in the tree. the current version of unifdef, as it stands, has some weaknesses. there's a newer version -- sunifdef -- that appears to be more robust and ruthless when it comes to cleaning. just an observation. http://www.sunifdef.strudl.org/ rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday ========================================================================