On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 11:35:32AM -0500, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 7:29 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > <hmh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > We will be happy to review the driver in linux-acpi. Submitting it as > > a single patch against latest Linus is probably best. > > I think I found the fan speed interface; I will resubmit to linux-acpi > after I finish it. > > > Oh, and it > > should be checkpatch-clean if it isn't already. > > Checkpatch complains about static variables initialized to 0. Since > it's my first time writing kernel code, I have to ask what are > probably obvious questions. > 1. Why is initializing a static variable to 0 bad? or worse than > initializing that variable to 1, or -1? > 2. If I want to have a module parameter whose default value is 0, what > should I do to stop checkpatch from complaining? Static variables are initialized to zero automatically. static int foo; is equivalent to static int foo = 0; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-laptop" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
