Re: [x86] is checkpatch.pl broken

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> by doing cleanup of arch/x86/boot/*.[ch] i found that
> checkpatch does ignore obvious things. For example,
> run it over edd.c showed only one warning:

I'm generally skeptical to the kind of "cleanups" that you seem to be 
referring to.  More often then not they reduce legibility instead of the 
opposite.

> ---
> cyrill@cvg linux-2.6.git $ scripts/checkpatch.pl --file arch/x86/boot/edd.c 
> WARNING: externs should be avoided in .c files
> #45: FILE: x86/boot/edd.c:45:
> +       extern char _end[];
> 
> total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 167 lines checked
> 
> Your patch has style problems, please review.  If any of these errors
> are false positives report them to the maintainer, see
> CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
> ---
> 
> but on line 53 we have:
> 
> mbr_base = (buf_base+sector_size-1) & ~(sector_size-1);
> 
> so checkpatch should at least worn me about missed space
> btw math operators. Am I wrong?

If checkpatch considered that line to be a problem, I would consider 
checkpatch to be utterly broken.  That line is perfectly legible, and 
padding in a bunch of spaces would make it LESS so, especially since it 
would have to be split between lines.

	-hpa