On Fri, 22 Dec 2023 at 23:09, Benjamin Berg <benja...@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2023-12-22 at 18:02 +0800, David Gow wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 at 23:20, <benja...@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Benjamin Berg <benjamin.b...@intel.com>
> > >
> > > The existing KUNIT_ARRAY_PARAM macro requires a separate function
> > > to
> > > get the description. However, in a lot of cases the description can
> > > just be copied directly from the array. Add a second macro that
> > > avoids having to write a static function just for a single strscpy.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Berg <benjamin.b...@intel.com>
> > > ---
> >
> > I'm generally pretty happy with this, though note the checkpatch
> > warning below.
> >
> > There was some discussion at plumbers about expanding the
> > parameterised test APIs, so we may need to adjust the implementation
> > of this down the line, but I don't think that'll happen for a while,
> > so don't worry.
> >
> > With the warnings fixed, this is:
>
> I think the checkpatch warning is a false positive. It seems to confuse
> the * as a multiplication due to typeof() looking like a function call
> rather than a variable declaration.
>
> Benjamin
>

Ah, yeah: this appears to be due to checkpatch not handling nested ()
within a typeof().

Reviewed-by: David Gow <david...@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to