Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760905AbYHOV6y (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:58:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752566AbYHOV6q (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:58:46 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:50571 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752549AbYHOV6p (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:58:45 -0400 Message-ID: <48A5FBFD.5080501@zytor.com> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:58:21 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Stern CC: Andy Whitcroft , Randy Dunlap , Joel Schopp , Kernel development list Subject: Re: Possible false positive in checkpatch References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 941 Lines: 37 Alan Stern wrote: > The following appears to be a false positive in checkpatch: > > ERROR: space prohibited after that '*' (ctx:BxW) > #163: FILE: drivers/usb/core/usb.c:304: > +#define usb_device_pm_ops (* (struct pm_ops *) 0) > ^ > > Certainly this is a rather uncommon code construction, but similar > ones might occur elsewhere. To my eyes, > > (* (type *) ptr) > > looks better than > > (*(type *) ptr) > > or > > (*(type *)ptr) > > or even > > (*(type*)ptr) > > but of course this is a matter of opinion. Is there any strong feeling > about this in the kernel community? > Personally, I rather strongly prefer (*(type *)ptr). -hpa -- 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/