Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp1015352pxj; Sat, 15 May 2021 00:55:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz4tZENjbTJ5YiIy6zhc+tq6WdCx+wRV/0bFIsrnVuRCtkG+BoKsrjXGj4FuzfSSYo9rVwz X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:c7:: with SMTP id i7mr61610321edu.194.1621065332832; Sat, 15 May 2021 00:55:32 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1621065332; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=U0KffS8MxWuIC1FCSkGoOLg+6OVAxlhJ0WPgXE+cYbvhdY3Fvzw6dr4aU8wdumVfNf TrM3gEucotxDWBnYxtS//aS5vX6di3KR/nv9GiPLsmlNjds7LjyI4N5hX1g2GlezkzX6 SzURdCFXevtXQWG8jnRNQ2+rH2f4Pmu4HVi7BSUDBIbeSIAcYpdpFTl7+NcRYPd1KNtb TUy4YPU/TevVFuplAHcZ50vArmPgfRUEdOPaUGJNvYUgajqehoSRfeqrxS57YNQzqglu oU6h6HUcdl5Gu3Z0r/E7qNBfmWKBhzSrBTbWX1uvYa+JMkJj+bFkEXzpBUO2ydXkLmzl 0zIQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject :message-id; bh=8d1blfRCK8mxmTLcN2wvCu5IZ9NEul7Ya4o5uJbC5Sc=; b=wZkcPX/56guvbu5UzuysZEGtNo9NIO/18FVtl+401jY1IYvcgOqgWTQnnfAQDznVE/ mFPC4wKOwdu+U52RZ126oUzhEG04E7dCQIHUZix+SdLmc4p5VBBxcR4zHpyolDMnkHxd rCZRiTTAGYrkg4Ol1djAE1d2xYZCKw7XHabTENF6l2m8zjKJhK5HLJzMhzitrZsXFTtN A+oQlSpPvoJ7ixM6fglUxsSycWISjRNTCiYLhCbwD96mROOv4vzcVi8ecIX6++XAmUBE A0/18PrHvu60c+NBp4kUP6j/LYgB30EUbERigkMsplyfz4RSBydkmcdjiiDgivBqd9ef S4WQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n2si7804856eda.470.2021.05.15.00.55.09; Sat, 15 May 2021 00:55:32 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231768AbhENTdz (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 14 May 2021 15:33:55 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0251.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.251]:36100 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231386AbhENTdy (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2021 15:33:54 -0400 Received: from omf07.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40FFD1810DA54; Fri, 14 May 2021 19:32:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D7010315D74; Fri, 14 May 2021 19:32:40 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <89a62ed669547eb989dd008b67165f3d0c9f4265.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: fix gb_loopback_stats_attrs definition From: Joe Perches To: Alex Elder , Greg KH , Shreyansh Chouhan Cc: pure.logic@nexus-software.ie, johan@kernel.org, elder@kernel.org, greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 12:32:39 -0700 In-Reply-To: <88d7da63-d03c-7fa3-a881-aff8e7b4a618@ieee.org> References: <20210514133039.304760-1-chouhan.shreyansh630@gmail.com> <88d7da63-d03c-7fa3-a881-aff8e7b4a618@ieee.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.1-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D7010315D74 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.40 X-Stat-Signature: cwerr3zmihx55crpj6cfhty19yuuzfrx X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout03 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX19FMxcCDKW900tDgf5rcwkgG+LUGqTv8gY= X-HE-Tag: 1621020760-252553 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2021-05-14 at 13:53 -0500, Alex Elder wrote: > On 5/14/21 10:56 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Fri, 2021-05-14 at 17:30 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 08:42:16PM +0530, Shreyansh Chouhan wrote: > > [] > > > > I didn't look at how/where was the macro called and missed a very > > > > obvious error. Now that I have looked at it, the only way I can think of > > > > fixing this is changing the macro to a (inline?) function. Will > > > > that be a desirable change? > > > > > > No, it can't be a function, the code is fine as-is, checkpatch is just a > > > perl script and does not always know what needs to be done. > > > > true. > > > > perhaps better though to rename these declaring macros to start with declare_ > > I don't disagree with your suggestion, but it's not clear it > would have prevented submission of the erroneous initial patch > (nor future ones from people who blindly follow checkpatch.pl > suggestions). With my checkpatch maintainer hat on: Yeah Alex, I know. checkpatch can't teach people c either. There's not much to do other than try to make the code clearer. Adding exceptions to checkpatch only leads to other exceptions and false negatives... > PS Lots of negatives in that sentence. Only positives... cheers, Joe