On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 20:13:46 +0530, Sachin Kamat wrote: > Hi Jean, > > On 27 August 2013 19:43, Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I totally agree, I think we want a checkpatch rule for this. I'll ask > > for it in a separate thread. > > I had already asked Joe to add this as a checkpatch rule. He mentioned > the following (which I quote): > "There's no way for checkpatch to look at an __<foo> use > and determine it should be before or after a variable. > > __scanf, __printf, __cold, etc are often place before > declarations." Just because we can't cover all the cases is no good reason to not cover this one specific problematic case. It's not about __<foo>, only about "struct __initdata" and "struct __initconst". If grep can find them, checkpatch should catch them too. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
