From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch: add double empty line check
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:45:49 +0200
Message-ID: <1353512749.32042.1.camel@lb-tlvb-eilong.il.broadcom.com>
References: <1353151057.14327.18.camel@lb-tlvb-eilong.il.broadcom.com>
 <20121120115239.GA7955@dm> <1353448728.17819.33.camel@joe-AO722>
 <20121120231930.GA27492@localhost>
 <1353454874.17819.41.camel@joe-AO722>
 <1353490921.6559.40.camel@lb-tlvb-eilong.il.broadcom.com>
 <1353510075.24807.24.camel@joe-AO722>
Reply-To: eilong@broadcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Andy Whitcroft" <apw@canonical.com>,
	"David Rientjes" <rientjes@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
To: "Joe Perches" <joe@perches.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1353510075.24807.24.camel@joe-AO722>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 07:01 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> checkpatch isn't a perfect tool.  Given how it's constructed,
> I doubt it ever could be.

Joe - I completely agree, this is why I'm not to concern about the
potential miss in the version I suggested.

Thanks,
Eilon