From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751720AbaJOTpw (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:45:52 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0108.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.108]:57026 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751059AbaJOTpw (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:45:52 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:800:960:973:982:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1540:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:2828:2902:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3622:3865:3866:3868:3870:3871:3874:4321:5007:6119:6261:10004:10400:10848:10967:11232:11658:11914:12517:12519:12740:13069:13311:13357:21080,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: kite84_32f37a0032526 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1820 Message-ID: <1413402348.7484.8.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] checkpatch: Add error on use of attribute((weak)) or __weak From: Joe Perches To: Andrew Morton Cc: Andy Whitcroft , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:45:48 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20141015124225.01a4cad19c4f3a198efc996e@linux-foundation.org> References: <4391d882bb26278110d07b9a5e23ec44f5f8328a.1413400022.git.joe@perches.com> <20141015124225.01a4cad19c4f3a198efc996e@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.7-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2014-10-15 at 12:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:32:08 -0700 Joe Perches wrote: > > > Using weak can have unintended link defects. > > Emit an error on its use. > > Well, we don't want a warning about use of __weak in function > definitions. Only in declarations. Why is that? > > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > @@ -4671,6 +4671,14 @@ sub process { > > } > > } > > > > +# Check for __attribute__ weak, or __weak (may have link issues) > > + if ($realfile !~ m@\binclude/uapi/@ && > > And this bit maybe is checking for use in a header file, which is not > as good as checking for a declaration but is probably good enough. > However the "uapi" bit is confusing. > > Can we have a better changelog please? Suggestions?