From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752833Ab2BTTIC (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:08:02 -0500 Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:45505 "EHLO acsinet15.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751574Ab2BTTH6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:07:58 -0500 Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:09:52 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Pradheep Shrinivasan Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, lucas.demarchi@profusion.mobi, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, devel@linuxdriverproject.org, Andy Whitcroft , joe@perches.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] staging: bcm: fix checkpatch.pl errors and warnings in Version.h Message-ID: <20120220190952.GN2912@mwanda> References: <4f428dfc.e302440a.02ba.6747@mx.google.com> <20120220183109.GL2855@mwanda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="+nG9yj4eE4W6Oba0" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090204.4F429A03.0098,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --+nG9yj4eE4W6Oba0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:13:40AM +0530, Pradheep Shrinivasan wrote: > Hi Dan >=20 > I remember the bug .. but i think in this case it would be ok as it does > not look that weird as in the case of the single character brackets. >=20 > In case you feel it is totally un necessary i can fix it and send the pat= ch > again. So are you asking me, are the parenthesis totally unnecessary? Yes. Absolutely. How could that macro possibly be expanded in a way that would cause a bug. Are you asking me if I think the code is better without unneeded parenthesis? Yes again. Are you asking me if I'm going to NAK your patch? No. It's an unfortunate thing. Checkpatch.pl is going around telling people to add bogus parenthesis everywhere, and no one likes to redo their patches. And I feel like a jerk for telling people that they should redo their patches. And checkpatch.pl is a robot which has more energy than I do. regards, dan carpenter --+nG9yj4eE4W6Oba0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJPQpqAAAoJEOnZkXI/YHqRFtEQAKjb8PcqzLrPReugn+IVwmB+ Osygdl36KQ0YjXXqcZcUrYleKIlNgQHcjbVMxxrlNRu+O3cL4a9Qp9m1DSV1MnpV nWut+QhFlEKe9DXtJUYGA92VdBmcVFeJC+Lxf9QavoueoUqkbEFY8otmUSjBisD2 dQfnigrGlaLfS9lyAICr4mPi9pugunJPlSPmDwBk1oRo5w+ABgAb8NKlFZR1NTYc CxxKdJ4t/IlqN54RR86ga9zmxoz19LntIXUfEIkLZe8F8laWp9VYWaJCdsAbtWO/ POAVOmAoNdWmob/LXTusYO/VjdASXGu00vr2+81iBqRSptQ0CvI0LHnN9mwQQQ4P TZb8RtdufUdWJwxssLNdavP4CPS6c0OeC1VpCjuaHwcpD/PPfOKOfx9gEBp0ZHrO +V+cAR22ILexLZGSwTY6rhcgUvZXhOp7pSXA/rVaDrVFjvx4qhFGlRW3i76SnE9W OJ3Og3xLfwyS9QGHZe/+43VA9dUPJhEZa63YIQoeEipVHj06PuHFRAtZu81swevh XzOk7Li8OrmW/eJwzuqz21XOoSieYZscE+AK0Z6E/GguJY/XTqVa1VwmpI8PxjGa vUHAeGJJDZVaaE6we8DXkeZlT6qkLnbziX+eLAN/vtwhtQesWRIlpQ7j7GWLXJKx 6uZFThvoBBTm0txEKwVH =gZd7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --+nG9yj4eE4W6Oba0--