Re: checkpatch warning of struct indentation

[Steven Rostedt]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009, Fr?d?ric Weisbecker wrote:

> 2009/1/12 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm now seeing the following warnings from checkpatch:
> >
> > #325: FILE: kernel/trace/trace_stat.c:21:
> > +       void                    *stat;
> >
> > ERROR: "foo     *bar" should be "foo *bar"
> > #334: FILE: kernel/trace/trace_stat.c:27:
> > +       struct tracer_stat      *ts;
> >
> > ERROR: "foo             *bar" should be "foo    *bar"
> > #337: FILE: kernel/trace/trace_stat.c:30:
> > +       struct dentry           *file;
> 
> 
> Oh my patch :-)
> Yeah I had the same errors when I checked it. I ignored them because
> I because I remembered checkpatch.pl didn't warn about such things before.
> And it seems to warn about such statements since very recently...

Heh, I should have CC'd you on this complaint ;-)

Yeah, this is a new warning and since we do a lot of these types of
indentation, and they are marked as "ERROR", I would like to see these go 
away. Perhaps they need to test for parenthesis, so:

 int func(foo		*bar)

gets caught.


[off topic, funny English grammar]

I noticed that you said:

   And it seems to warn about such statements since very recently

This sounds strange. I know in German (and I know you are not German, but 
it's what I have most experience with) the word "seit" gets translated 
into "since" for such statements as above. A lot of Germans that I know 
make this funny sounding phrase. I would have written it like:

   And, recently, it seems to warn about such statements.

Don't take this as a criticism. I'm the last person to criticize anyone's 
grammar. For being an English speaking native, my grammar sucks ;-)
And your statement may indeed be correct grammar. It just sounds a little
funny to me.

In a lot of cases, (for Germans) "seit" can correctly be translated into
"since" but there are times that it just sounds funny.

A common phrase from Germans are:

  I've been doing this since three years.

Just an observation, carry on ;-)

-- Steve


> 
> 
> > This is for:
> >
> > struct tracer_stat_session {
> >        struct list_head        session_list;
> >        struct tracer_stat      *ts;
> >        struct list_head        stat_list;
> >        struct mutex            stat_mutex;
> >        struct dentry           *file;
> > };
> >
> > Which looks a hell of a lot better than:
> >
> > struct tracer_stat_session {
> >        struct list_head session_list;
> >        struct tracer_stat *ts;
> >        struct list_head stat_list;
> >        struct mutex stat_mutex;
> >        struct dentry *file;
> > };
> >
> > We probably do not want to warn on such things.
> >
> > -- Steve
> >
> > --
> > 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/
> >
> 
> 
--
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/