Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] checkpatch.pl: Add warning for new __packed additions | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Mon, 24 Feb 2014 13:28:24 -0800 |
| |
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 16:11 -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > On 02/24/2014 04:00 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 15:38 -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. [] > > How often is this actually a problem? > > I think the first line answers the second one, honestly. If one wants > to get pedantic about things and really investigate there's probably > some unneeded usages scattered about, and that's generally the type of > thing one wants to address when checking whole files, right?
Maybe not.
That entirely depends on the correct and necessary uses of packed vs the incorrect usage rates.
I think almost all packed uses are correct and there might be a lot of patches submitted to remove them by over-zealous advocates of checkpatch -f.
> > This may be better as > > "Using 'packed' can impact performance\n" > > and only tested when not in --file mode. > > I can also make this change, sure, just point me off-list for an example > to crib from and test?
Look at the FSF mailing address test as an example:
my $msg_type = \&ERROR; $msg_type = \&CHK if ($file); &{$msg_type}("FSF_MAILING_ADDRESS",
| |