On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 01:11 +0200, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
> On Tue, 17 May 2011 01:04:50 +0200, Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 14:34 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> >> On Mon, 16 May 2011, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
> >> > > Now that accessing current->comm needs to be protected,
> >> > > +# check for current->comm usage
> >> > > + if ($line =~ /\b(?:current|task|tsk|t)\s*->\s*comm\b/) {
> >> > Not a checkpatch.pl expert but as far as I'm concerned, that looks
> >> reasonable.
> > You don't need (?: just (
> Yep, it's a micro-optimisation though.
True, but it's not the common style in checkpatch.
You could submit patches to add non-capture markers to other () uses.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>