* New 2.6.36 checkpatch complaints about leading whitespace
@ 2010-10-30 9:35 Bart Van Assche
2010-11-01 4:10 ` Andy Whitcroft
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2010-10-30 9:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andy Whitcroft; +Cc: LKML, Vladislav Bolkhovitin
Hello Andy,
Apparently the checkpatch.pl script as included in 2.6.36 complains if
continued lines start with whitespace. An example:
[ ... ]
+#if defined(MACRO_NAME_1) || defined(MACRO_NAME_2) \
+ || defined(MACRO_NAME_3)
[ ... ]
checkpatch.pl reports the following warning for the above patch excerpt:
WARNING: please, no space for starting a line,
excluding comments
Is that a feature or an unintended side effect of recent checkpatch changes ?
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: New 2.6.36 checkpatch complaints about leading whitespace
2010-10-30 9:35 New 2.6.36 checkpatch complaints about leading whitespace Bart Van Assche
@ 2010-11-01 4:10 ` Andy Whitcroft
2010-11-01 7:29 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andy Whitcroft @ 2010-11-01 4:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bart Van Assche; +Cc: LKML, Vladislav Bolkhovitin
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:35:22AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Hello Andy,
>
> Apparently the checkpatch.pl script as included in 2.6.36 complains if
> continued lines start with whitespace. An example:
>
> [ ... ]
> +#if defined(MACRO_NAME_1) || defined(MACRO_NAME_2) \
> + || defined(MACRO_NAME_3)
> [ ... ]
>
> checkpatch.pl reports the following warning for the above patch excerpt:
>
> WARNING: please, no space for starting a line,
> excluding comments
>
> Is that a feature or an unintended side effect of recent checkpatch changes ?
My personal expectation would be for that second line to be indented
with a tab. But I might be convinced otherwise?
-apw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: New 2.6.36 checkpatch complaints about leading whitespace
2010-11-01 4:10 ` Andy Whitcroft
@ 2010-11-01 7:29 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2010-11-01 7:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andy Whitcroft; +Cc: LKML, Vladislav Bolkhovitin
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:35:22AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > Hello Andy,
> >
> > Apparently the checkpatch.pl script as included in 2.6.36 complains if
> > continued lines start with whitespace. An example:
> >
> > [ ... ]
> > +#if defined(MACRO_NAME_1) || defined(MACRO_NAME_2) \
> > + || defined(MACRO_NAME_3)
> > [ ... ]
> >
> > checkpatch.pl reports the following warning for the above patch excerpt:
> >
> > WARNING: please, no space for starting a line,
> > excluding comments
> >
> > Is that a feature or an unintended side effect of recent checkpatch changes ?
>
> My personal expectation would be for that second line to be indented
> with a tab. But I might be convinced otherwise?
There are also other preprocessor directives on which the 2.6.36
checkpatch complains, e.g.:
#warning A very long warning message that takes multiple lines and of which\
the second line starts with a space.
Why does the 2.6.36 checkpatch complain that the second line should
start with a tab instead of a space (which would make the message
really ugly) ?
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-11-01 7:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-10-30 9:35 New 2.6.36 checkpatch complaints about leading whitespace Bart Van Assche
2010-11-01 4:10 ` Andy Whitcroft
2010-11-01 7:29 ` Bart Van Assche
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.