Re: Possible false positive from checkpatch.pl

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 12:52 -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
> Andy,
> 
> In preparing a vendor driver for submission to staging, I am getting the 
> following from checkpatch.pl:
> 
> ERROR: Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while loop
> #377: FILE: staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_mp_ioctl.h:377:
> +#define GEN_MP_IOCTL_HANDLER(sz, hdl, oid) {sz, hdl, oid},

I think you should leave off the trailing comma from the macros
and C99 might be better.  Maybe something like:

(whatever the field names really are)

#define GEN_MP_IOCTL_HANDLER(sz, hdl, oid)	\
	{.field1 = sz, .field2 = hdl, .field3 = oid}

> ERROR: Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while loop
> #378: FILE: staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_mp_ioctl.h:378:
> +#define EXT_MP_IOCTL_HANDLER(sz, subcode, oid) {sz, &mp_ioctl_ \
> +       ## subcode ## _hdl, oid},

The line continuation is rather ugly too.  Perhaps it's better as:

#define EXT_MP_IOCTL_HANDLER(sz, subcode, oid)	\
	{.field1 = sz, .field2 = &mp_ioctl_##subcode##_hdl, .field3 = oid}

They pass checkpatch without error.

$ cat foo.h
#define GEN_MP_IOCTL_HANDLER(sz, hdl, oid)	\
	{.field1 = sz, .field2 = hdl, .field3 = oid}
#define EXT_MP_IOCTL_HANDLER(sz, subcode, oid)	\
	{.field1 = sz, .field2 = &mp_ioctl_##subcode##_hdl, .field3 = oid}
$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -f foo.h
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 4 lines checked

foo.h has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.

--
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/