On Tue, 2013-07-30 at 09:30 +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > On 2013/7/30 3:52, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > Hi Andy and Joe, > > > > Checkpatch is complaining when code adds new trace events macros: > > > > sarah@xanatos:~/git/kernels/xhci$ git am -s ~/Maildir.fetchmail/.to-apply > > Applying: xhci: add traces for debug messages in xhci_address_device() > > ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parenthesis > > #86: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-trace.h:15: > > +#define TRACE_SYSTEM xhci-hcd > > > > ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parenthesis > > #115: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-trace.h:44: > > +#define TRACE_INCLUDE_PATH . > > > > ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parenthesis > > #118: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-trace.h:47: > > +#define TRACE_INCLUDE_FILE xhci-trace > > > > total: 3 errors, 0 warnings, 169 lines checked > > > > > > The macros have to be defined that way for trace events to work. > > yeah, that's true, and we always just ignore chechpatch complaints > when it comes to TRACE_EVENT macros. > > > Can you fix checkpatch not to complain about trace event macros? > >
So what are these TRACE_<FOO> defines that need excluding from the "complex values" check? Anything other than TRACE_SYSTEM TRACE_INCLUDE_FILE TRACE_INCLUDE_PATH ? samples/trace_events/trace-events-sample.h only has those 3. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
