Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933311AbYB2Uqz (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:46:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752864AbYB2Uqr (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:46:47 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.13]:34633 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751598AbYB2Uqq (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:46:46 -0500 Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:46:05 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Andy Whitcroft Cc: eibach@gdsys.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, greg@kroah.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: add sysfs configuration interface for CP2101 Message-Id: <20080229124605.24c49ed5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080229144437.GD28849@shadowen.org> References: <47C7CA1A.3080001@gdsys.de> <20080229020245.61f1f8f4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080229144437.GD28849@shadowen.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-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 Content-Length: 1372 Lines: 34 On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:44:37 +0000 Andy Whitcroft wrote: > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 02:02:45AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:02:18 +0100 Dirk Eibach wrote: > > > We have a new strict_strtoul() (and related functions) which will perform > > proper checking for a valid number. Please use that interface. > > > > Andy, this is going to happen so much that a "should you have used > > strict_strtoul?" warning in checkpatch would reduce my email output. > > Sure, will add something. I wonder if this new interface is documented. It has kerneldoc. > I note that this interface is new in -mm at this time. It is in mainline. > So that brings > up an interesting question as to how one would integrate this check with > checkpatch. As checking patches for mainline, this would be an > incorrect check until that patch merges. I guess the right thing to do > is provide a separate patch for checkpatch which adds this check which > should sit with the patch in your tree which adds the functionality. > It would be easier to just update your kernel tree ;) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/