lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Checkpatch false positive?
    On Tue 27-01-09 08:19:54, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
    > On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:49:05 +0100
    > Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
    >
    > > Hi,
    > >
    > > I've used checkpatch.pl to verify one of my patches. It complains:
    > >
    > > ERROR: trailing statements should be on next line
    > > #167: FILE: fs/quota/quota_tree.c:249:
    > > + for (i = 0, ddquot = buf + sizeof(struct qt_disk_dqdbheader);
    > > [...]
    > > i++, ddquot += info->dqi_entry_size);
    > >
    > > But the code looks like:
    > > for (i = 0, ddquot = buf + sizeof(struct qt_disk_dqdbheader);
    > > i < qtree_dqstr_in_blk(info)
    > > && !qtree_entry_unused(info, ddquot); i++, ddquot +=
    > > info->dqi_entry_size);
    > >
    >
    > while tihs might be correct C... don't you think it would be much
    > better to actually have a statement here rather than cramming
    > everything into the for ?
    This is an old code and I was just wrapping lines to fit into 80 chars...
    But you're right, I can rewrite the loop into more readable form when I'm
    at it.

    Honza
    --
    Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
    SUSE Labs, CR


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-01-27 17:35    [W:0.021 / U:59.972 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site