On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 10:01:23PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > int __initdata user_defined_memmap = 0; > > checkpatch should have told you that this "= 0" shouldn't be there. But it > doesn't.
Ok, this line would be correctly picked up if it was being added by this author, but this line is in the context only. We do not blame the current author for those. ERROR: do not initialise externals to 0 or NULL #1: FILE: Z57.c:1: +int __initdata user_defined_memmap = 0; > > + for (pos = (u8 *)hdr; pos < (u8 *)hdr + len; pos ++) > > checkpatch should have caught the " ++" but didn't. I think it used to. > It seems to be going backwards? Somehow this variant was not covered. Added to the tests and to the next version: ERROR: no space before that '++' (ctx:WxB) #3: FILE: Z57.c:3: + for (pos = (u8 *)hdr; pos < (u8 *)hdr + len; pos ++) -apw -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/