Re: Coding style details (checkpatch)

[Frans Klaver]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Krzysztof HaÅasa <khalasa@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Frans Klaver <fransklaver@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>>> #define REG8_1(a0) ((const u16[8]){a0, a0 + 1, a0 + 2, a0 + 3})
>>>
>>> vs
>>>
>>> #define REG8_1(a0) ((const u16[8]) {a0, a0 + 1, a0 + 2, a0 + 3})
>>>                                 ^^^^^
>>
>> The prescribed style is to have no space between cast and castee. So,
>> the top option.
>
> Thanks. That's what I thought. It looks that checkpatch doesn't like
> this:
>
> ERROR: space required before the open brace '{'
> +#define REG8_1(a0) ((const u16[8]){a0, a0 + 1, a0 + 2, a0 + 3})
>
> Does this qualify as the "false positive"?

Ah, right. One might say that this is a false positive, but that's up
to Joe or Andy I guess.

It may be valid C code, but I think this construction is slightly
funky to begin with.

Which file is this?

Frans
--
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/