From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] iwlwifi: Add __printf argument checking to __iwl_dbg
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 19:40:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1336671612.4334.25.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1336671240.22495.20.camel@joe2Laptop>
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 10:34 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 18:50 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 09:38 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > Add gcc format and argument printf checking
> > > to reduce future defect introduction.
> []
> > > #if defined(CONFIG_IWLWIFI_DEBUG) || defined(CONFIG_IWLWIFI_DEVICE_TRACING)
> > > +__printf(5, 6)
> > > void __iwl_dbg(struct device *dev,
> > > u32 level, bool limit, const char *function,
> > > const char *fmt, ...);
> >
> > But that looks a bit odd to me? It would seem more natural to me to put
> > the attribute after the parameter list?
>
> It's an attribute of the function and
> this style is used almost everywhere
> in the kernel.
I also found that for the inline, it *has* to be there. Checkpatch
doesn't like it though if I put it in the same line as "static inline
void" ;-)
johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-10 17:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-10 16:05 [PATCH 0/4] iwlwifi fixes Johannes Berg
2012-05-10 16:05 ` [PATCH 1/4] iwlwifi: fix prints in iwl_rx_handle Johannes Berg
2012-05-10 16:38 ` [PATCH 1/4] iwlwifi: Add __printf argument checking to __iwl_dbg Joe Perches
2012-05-10 16:50 ` Johannes Berg
2012-05-10 16:56 ` Johannes Berg
2012-05-10 17:34 ` Joe Perches
2012-05-10 17:40 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2012-05-10 18:01 ` Joe Perches
2012-05-11 10:59 ` [PATCH 1/4 v2] iwlwifi: fix prints in iwl_rx_handle Johannes Berg
2012-05-11 16:49 ` Sedat Dilek
2012-05-10 16:05 ` [PATCH 2/4] iwlwifi: fix the Transmit Frame Descriptor rings Johannes Berg
2012-05-11 12:50 ` [PATCH 2/4 v2] " Johannes Berg
2012-05-11 16:50 ` Sedat Dilek
2012-05-16 15:16 ` [PATCH 2/4] " Johannes Berg
2012-05-10 16:05 ` [PATCH 3/4] iwlwifi: fix debug print in iwl_sta_calc_ht_flags Johannes Berg
2012-05-11 16:52 ` Sedat Dilek
2012-05-10 16:05 ` [PATCH 4/4] iwlwifi: do not send lq cmd when station add fails Johannes Berg
2012-05-11 16:53 ` Sedat Dilek
2012-05-16 17:05 ` [PATCH 0/4] iwlwifi fixes John W. Linville
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1336671612.4334.25.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).