Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751448AbZIIELN (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Sep 2009 00:11:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750839AbZIIELM (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Sep 2009 00:11:12 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f173.google.com ([209.85.211.173]:46030 "EHLO mail-yw0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750778AbZIIELM (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Sep 2009 00:11:12 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent:message-id; b=cs5vziRrv4EgurbkrFTJHs+yc44NyYwqD4vs4XtNm7jedkJBA75HfFJbT0NZ+7CFhJ LPxttBuP0ywo1v5yxFhR97y2oorILQ902gCEQZdYhJZ5Mz8B+oOqgyg+4xYiVYAt2BRk vnK/QlNicx/IcSKXWVwPC99Is/eFxVHqJYIlc= Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 21:11:05 -0700 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Paul Mundt , Daniel Walker , Joe Perches , Tim Abbott , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] Use new __init_task_data macro in arch init_task.c files. References: <1252464546-26394-1-git-send-email-tabbott@ksplice.com> <1252464546-26394-3-git-send-email-tabbott@ksplice.com> <1252465099.14793.49.camel@desktop> <1252465417.28130.3.camel@Joe-Laptop.home> <1252465625.14793.52.camel@desktop> <1252465802.28130.9.camel@Joe-Laptop.home> <1252466482.14793.60.camel@desktop> <20090909033237.GC23049@linux-sh.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090909033237.GC23049@linux-sh.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Message-Id: <20090909044434.3E30D526EC9@mailhub.coreip.homeip.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2097 Lines: 47 On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 12:32:38PM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote: > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 08:21:22PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 20:10 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 20:07 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 20:03 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 19:58 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 22:49 -0400, Tim Abbott wrote: > > > > > > > +union thread_union init_thread_union __init_task_data = > > > > > > > + { INIT_THREAD_INFO(init_task) }; > > > > > > All the lines like the above are all producing checkpatch errors.. It > > > > > > looks like the open brace needs to be up with the equals .. > > > > > Some checkpatch errors are ignorable. > > > > > checkpatch output is a guide, not a rule. > > > > > > > > Not errors, those aren't usually ignorable .. Warnings, those could be.. > > > > > > Shrug. So submit a patch... > > > > I would if this was code in the kernel already, but it's not. LKML > > submission is the process people use to find these types of issues. > > Issues that should be fixed prior to inclusion, and may have been > > overlooked.. > > > Did you even bother reading the patch? This is exactly the format that is > in the kernel today (and even predates checkpatch), it's just that > checkpatch doesn't presently complain about it due to how the section > parsing is done. If you move the section annotation down to a separate > line, it also silences checkpatch. In this case, checkpatch is simply > broken and can be ignored. Stylistic "errors" are complete nonsense. The struct data_struct var_name __section_decoration = { initializator, }; is a canonical format for the kernel though so if somebody feels strongly about being "checkpatch clean" he can post a follow-up patch ;) -- Dmitry -- 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/