From: H Hartley Sweeten <email@example.com>
Isn't it intentional? The two consts mark different aspects
of the declaration const, both the pointers as well as the
contents pointed to.
On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
I believe that'd be -
static const char *const kmsg_reasons
rather than what was originally in the code -
static const char const *kmsg_reasons
Read right-to-left, the first is a constant pointer to a char constant;
the second is a pointer to a constant character constant. I suspect
the first is what was intended.