On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 17:47 -0400, Michael Shuey wrote: > Any suggestions on other checkpatch warnings? Most of what remains are > "don't introduce new typedefs" warnings - should these be removed as well, > or am I safe to leave these? I'm personally not a big fan of non-enum typedefs unless the typedef hides some arch or size specific information that's otherwise hard to handle. I think struct/function/native type equivalent typedefs are better removed. coccinelle is a good tool for this. I rather like enum typedefs, but that's not a common view in lk land. > I ask because these changes will be huge, and > are unlikely to improve readability (but I don't know where the kernel > community stands on having billions of typedefs everywhere. I counted slightly less than billions. I got 281. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
