From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752105AbdLJM5W (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Dec 2017 07:57:22 -0500 Received: from mail-qk0-f179.google.com ([209.85.220.179]:41976 "EHLO mail-qk0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751750AbdLJM5T (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Dec 2017 07:57:19 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYtc/aQb/f8Z4rH19ZZqLDyxWsdoPQx1ABOIzYxJpqxTB9hkO/sXXEl1ShIVZ7TQYbTuSClzguhfXvy2AjOxgs= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171207133915.29448-2-brgl@bgdev.pl> References: <20171207133915.29448-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20171207133915.29448-2-brgl@bgdev.pl> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 14:57:18 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] eeprom: at24: fix coding style issues To: Bartosz Golaszewski Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= , Peter Rosin , linux-i2c , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > Fix issues reported by checkpatch for at24.c. > +module_param(io_limit, uint, 0000); > +module_param(write_timeout, uint, 0000); 0 is a pretty much octal number as 0000. So, I would prefer not to blindly follow the stupid advise from checkpatch, better to teach checkpatch about 0. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko