Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:19:54 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: apw@canonical.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Checkpatch false positive?
Message-ID: <20090127081954.47609e46@infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090127154904.GC8289@duck.suse.cz>
References: <20090127154904.GC8289@duck.suse.cz>
Organization: Intel
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1009
Lines: 28

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:49:05 +0100
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:

>   Hi,
> 
>   I've used checkpatch.pl to verify one of my patches. It complains:
> 
> ERROR: trailing statements should be on next line
> #167: FILE: fs/quota/quota_tree.c:249:
> +       for (i = 0, ddquot = buf + sizeof(struct qt_disk_dqdbheader);
> [...]
>              i++, ddquot += info->dqi_entry_size);
> 
>   But the code looks like:
>         for (i = 0, ddquot = buf + sizeof(struct qt_disk_dqdbheader);
>              i < qtree_dqstr_in_blk(info)
> && !qtree_entry_unused(info, ddquot); i++, ddquot +=
> info->dqi_entry_size);
> 

while tihs might be correct C... don't you think it would be much
better to actually have a statement here rather than cramming
everything into the for ?
--
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/