Hi Dan, Thank you for your reply. # I don't want to be rude, but it's basically a kernel hacker rule that # after you introduce a bug (and your last cleanup patch did) that you # have to fix a bug to make up for it. One excellent source of easy bugs No offense taken. There are already other mails in the pipe to actually do that last "multi"-patch properly. Just felt to finally give feedback at least. # is using static checkers. I just used smatch as you proposed. That's where I started to dive into some code that I had to understand before continuing "fixing" something else. And I still try to figure out some pieces (had a big break for the locality change too).. More in the upcoming mails. # I've found a static checker bug for you. You've been invaluable already, thank you. I'll try myself one after another. Maybe first the bug found by smatch (some offset prob), then this one. Hm, we'll see. Some answer right away, the rest gets pushed on the todo stack. # 4) Is it a special case where the caller handles it differently? # Use cscope for this. # ^] takes you back a step. Good hint, thx. Hitting esc+alt+] is so "expensive" with this kb layout (you risk breaking your hand doing that).. ;) # cscope is an essential kernel hacking tool. Thank you very much for your detailed explanation. I am already familiar with cscope, in this case. # !skb is better as Al Viro explains in this email: # http://lwn.net/Articles/331593/ Great, thank you! Cheers, Nils -- :x Think-Future.com :) Yevtushenko has... an ego that can crack crystal at a distance of twenty feet. -- John Cheever -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
