lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] test-hexdump.c: Fix initconst confusion
On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 03:35:54PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > --- a/lib/test-hexdump.c
> > +++ b/lib/test-hexdump.c
> > @@ -18,26 +18,26 @@ static const unsigned char data_b[] = {
> >
> > static const unsigned char data_a[] = ".2.{....p..$}.4...1.....L...C...";
> >
> > -static const char *test_data_1_le[] __initconst = {
> > +static const char * const test_data_1_le[] __initconst = {
>
> const char * const __initconst

This one didn't cause any warnings elsewhere.

>
> > "be", "32", "db", "7b", "0a", "18", "93", "b2",
> > "70", "ba", "c4", "24", "7d", "83", "34", "9b",
> > "a6", "9c", "31", "ad", "9c", "0f", "ac", "e9",
> > "4c", "d1", "19", "99", "43", "b1", "af", "0c",
> > };
> >
> > +static const char *test_data_2_le[] __initdata = {
> > +static const char *test_data_4_le[] __initdata = {
> > +static const char *test_data_8_le[] __initdata = {
>
> const char * __initdata
>
> Why is test_data_1_le[] different?
>
> Can we make them all "const char * const __initconst"? That would make
> checkpatch happy ;)

I tried it, but it would have needed a lot more changes to shut up
warnings later in the code. This was the least intrusive.

checkpatch is a bit stupid about this, but then C declarations are
difficult to parse...

-Andi

--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-09 02:21    [W:0.828 / U:0.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site