Re: checkpatch.pl report about "Missing blank line after
> declarations" in a structure definition
>
> On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 15:19 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
> > In our code (I take it as an example), we used
> > MLX5_DECLARE_DOORBELL_LOCK, So I guess that the re
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 15:19 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
> In our code (I take it as an example), we used MLX5_DECLARE_DOORBELL_LOCK,
> So I guess that the regular expression that you mentioned will fail on it
> (because the "_" is not allowed to be repeated).
>
> So, I would change it a little bit
In our code (I take it as an example), we used MLX5_DECLARE_DOORBELL_LOCK,
So I guess that the regular expression that you mentioned will fail on it
(because the "_" is not allowed to be repeated).
So, I would change it a little bit to allow people to use underscore as a word
separator.
Thanks
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 14:50 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
> I think that allowing a prefix is reasonable (to allow modules to add more
> flexibility).
> I tried the suggested change and it still didn't work for me.
>
> The following change worked for me:
>
vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: checkpatch.pl report about "Missing blank line after
> declarations" in a structure definition
>
> On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 14:14 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
> > Hi Joe.
> >
> > The patch that you mentioned solved most of the issues, t
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 14:14 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
> Hi Joe.
>
> The patch that you mentioned solved most of the issues, thanks!
>
> However, there is still one more warning of this type within a struct
> declaration.
>
> # ./checkpatch.pl --file --no-tree ../include/linux/mlx5/driver.h
>
nal Message-
> From: Joe Perches [mailto:j...@perches.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 4:36 PM
> To: Dotan Barak
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: checkpatch.pl report about "Missing blank line after
> declarations" in a structure definition
>
&
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 11:20 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
> Hi Joe.
>
> Thanks for fixing the issue that I reported about.
>
> It seems that even after your fix, there is still a false warning of "Missing
> blank line after declarations".
>
> I executed checkpatch.pl on a header file that exists
Hi Joe.
Thanks for fixing the issue that I reported about.
It seems that even after your fix, there is still a false warning of "Missing
blank line after declarations".
I executed checkpatch.pl on a header file that exists in the Linux tree:
# ./checkpatch.pl --file --no-tree
Hi Joe.
Thanks for fixing the issue that I reported about.
It seems that even after your fix, there is still a false warning of Missing
blank line after declarations.
I executed checkpatch.pl on a header file that exists in the Linux tree:
# ./checkpatch.pl --file --no-tree
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 11:20 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
Hi Joe.
Thanks for fixing the issue that I reported about.
It seems that even after your fix, there is still a false warning of Missing
blank line after declarations.
I executed checkpatch.pl on a header file that exists in the
-Original Message-
From: Joe Perches [mailto:j...@perches.com]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 4:36 PM
To: Dotan Barak
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: checkpatch.pl report about Missing blank line after
declarations in a structure definition
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 11:20
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 14:14 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
Hi Joe.
The patch that you mentioned solved most of the issues, thanks!
However, there is still one more warning of this type within a struct
declaration.
# ./checkpatch.pl --file --no-tree ../include/linux/mlx5/driver.h
WARNING:
Subject: Re: checkpatch.pl report about Missing blank line after
declarations in a structure definition
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 14:14 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
Hi Joe.
The patch that you mentioned solved most of the issues, thanks!
However, there is still one more warning of this type within
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 14:50 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
I think that allowing a prefix is reasonable (to allow modules to add more
flexibility).
I tried the suggested change and it still didn't work for me.
The following change worked for me:
In our code (I take it as an example), we used MLX5_DECLARE_DOORBELL_LOCK,
So I guess that the regular expression that you mentioned will fail on it
(because the _ is not allowed to be repeated).
So, I would change it a little bit to allow people to use underscore as a word
separator.
Thanks
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 15:19 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
In our code (I take it as an example), we used MLX5_DECLARE_DOORBELL_LOCK,
So I guess that the regular expression that you mentioned will fail on it
(because the _ is not allowed to be repeated).
So, I would change it a little bit to
report about Missing blank line after
declarations in a structure definition
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 15:19 +, Dotan Barak wrote:
In our code (I take it as an example), we used
MLX5_DECLARE_DOORBELL_LOCK, So I guess that the regular expression
that you mentioned will fail on it (because
18 matches
Mail list logo
