On Fri, 2021-05-14 at 13:53 -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
On 5/14/21 10:56 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
On Fri, 2021-05-14 at 17:30 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 08:42:16PM +0530, Shreyansh Chouhan wrote:
[]
I didn't look at how/where was the macro called and missed a very obvious error. Now that I have looked at it, the only way I can think of fixing this is changing the macro to a (inline?) function. Will that be a desirable change?
No, it can't be a function, the code is fine as-is, checkpatch is just a perl script and does not always know what needs to be done.
true.
perhaps better though to rename these declaring macros to start with declare_
I don't disagree with your suggestion, but it's not clear it would have prevented submission of the erroneous initial patch (nor future ones from people who blindly follow checkpatch.pl suggestions).
With my checkpatch maintainer hat on:
Yeah Alex, I know. checkpatch can't teach people c either. There's not much to do other than try to make the code clearer. Adding exceptions to checkpatch only leads to other exceptions and false negatives...
PS Lots of negatives in that sentence.
Only positives...
cheers, Joe