Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Improve missing blank line after declarations test

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 05 May 2014 13:12:16 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> A couple more modifications to the declarations tests.
> 
> o Declarations can also be bitfields so exclude things with a colon
> o Make sure the current and previous lines are indented the same
>   to avoid matching some macro where a struct type is passed on
>   the previous line like:
> 
> 		next = list_entry(buffer->entry.next,
> 				  struct binder_buffer, entry);
> 		if (buffer_start_page(next) == buffer_end_page(buffer)) 

So checkpatch-always-warn-on-missing-blank-line-after-variable-declaration-block.patch
is stuck in -mm while I evaluate its effects.  Thus far that evaluation
has been "super non-intrusive", because the patch doesn't actually
do anything.

--- a/fs/open.c~a
+++ a/fs/open.c
@@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ int do_truncate(struct dentry *dentry, l
 {
 	int ret;
 	struct iattr newattrs;
+	wibble();
 
 	/* Not pretty: "inode->i_size" shouldn't really be signed. But it is. */
 	if (length < 0)
@@ -67,6 +68,7 @@ long vfs_truncate(struct path *path, lof
 {
 	struct inode *inode;
 	long error;
+	wobble();
 
 	inode = path->dentry->d_inode;
 



I add --strict and it still doesn't warn.  What did I do wrong this time?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/