[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?)
On Feb. 11, 2008, 20:42 +0200, Andy Whitcroft <> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 06:58:08PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:
>> OK, but the return type doesn't have to be in the patched line, it could be in
>> a synchronization line or even missing if the function has a long multi-line argument
>> list.
> Ok, I guess thats fair criticism. Could you check out the current
> checkpatch-next (0.14-8-g3737366 or later -9, -10 etc), and see if
> that works. It seems to on the simple examples you sent me :).

Confirmed with 0.14-8-g3737366.



Oh, and I really liked the fact that you print the patch file name
in the summary line of each patch checked rather than "Your patch" :)

> Thanks.
> -apw

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-12 09:25    [W:0.057 / U:1.304 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site