On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 11:48:10PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2023-10-09 at 22:05 +0200, Max Kellermann wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:24 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Also, I don't know why checkpatch is happy with all the > > > > > > const struct attribute_group *const*groups; > > > > > > instead of > > > > > > const struct attribute_group *const *groups; > > > > I found out that checkpatch has no check for this at all; it does > > complain about such lines, but only for local variables. But that > > warning is actually a bug, because this is a check for unary > > operators: it thinks the asterisk is a dereference operator, not a > > pointer declaration, and complains that the unary operator must be > > preceded by a space. Thus warnings on local variable are only correct > > by coincidence, not by design. > > > > Inside structs or parameters (where my coding style violations can be > > found), it's a different context and thus checkpatch doesn't apply the > > rules for unary operators. > > My opinion is that const use in the kernel should almost > always have whitespace before and after it except when > preceded by a open parenthesis or a newline. I totally agree.
