Valdis, I do understand your concern with me finding one of the few false positives, due to my issues already with the community. I am trying my best now to improve and work toward good,solid work that is of actual use to the community and avoid shitty patches and not listening like I did for the last few months. Sorry, Nick On 14-10-12 06:34 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote: > On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 14:52:40 +0100, Hugo Mills said: > >> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 09:44:05AM -0400, nick wrote: >>> Thank you for your help, I'll study the code and see what I can do >>> about it. Do you have any suggestions of how to fix this checkpatch >>> warning? >> >> Ignore it. The checker has clearly triggered on a false positive -- >> this is not a function call, and should not be held to that standard. >> (Take a look at where the macro is actually used, to see what's going >> on here). Move on to find something more interesting to fix. > > Am I the only one suspicious of the fact that Nick found one of the > few false positives rather than one of the plentiful actual style > problems? > _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
