On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 03:38:16PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
> While there are valid reasons to use __packed, often the answer is that
> you should be doing something else here instead.
>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Joe Perches <j...@perches.com>
> Cc: Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com>
> ---
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 0ea2a1e..fef3b13 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -4010,6 +4010,11 @@ sub process {
> WARN("PREFER_PACKED",
> "__packed is preferred over
> __attribute__((packed))\n" . $herecurr);
> }
> +# Check for new packed usage, warn to use care
> + if ($line =~
> /\b(__attribute__\s*\(\s*\(.*\bpacked|__packed)\b/) {
> + WARN("NEW_PACKED",
> + "Adding new packed members is to be done with
> care\n" . $herecurr);
> + }
This seems wrong; "is to be done with care" is the very definition of a
false positive. At *best* this should always be CHK, and even then it
seems excessive.
- Josh Triplett
--
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/
