Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:33:03 -0400 | From | Dave Jones <> | Subject | Re: [patch 2.6.25-rc5 2/2] gpiochip_reserve() |
| |
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 04:06:06PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:52:21 -0800 > David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> wrote: > > > +int __init __must_check gpiochip_reserve(int start, int ngpio) > > I applaud the addition of __msut_check to a newly-added function of this > kind, but we usually only add the tag to the declaration, not to the > definition as well.
A bit unfortunate really, given that use of ctags and friends in some editors jumps to the first definition they come across, so if the prototype is stuffed somewhere in include/, it shows the definitions from drivers or fs or wherever that doesn't have the tag.
Given it doesn't cost us anything except a few more bytes in the source code, is consistency such a bad thing?
Dave
-- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| |