On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 01:15:57PM -0400, Joe Perches wrote: > On Sat, 2016-08-27 at 22:47 -0400, Levin, Alexander wrote: > > > Would you agree that by default we shouldn't show anything that's > > not an error/defect? > > Not particularly, no.
I think that we need to figure out this disagreement first then. My claim is that checkpatch's output isn't useful. Based on your bash snippet, populated with the KS program committee + the first few maintainers I spotted on 'git log': commiter commits issues arnd 858 2155 axboe 53 22 corbet 15 9 davem 55 81 grant.likely 2 0 gregkh 38 46 hch 393 581 James.Bottomley 15 15 martin.petersen 18 20 mchehab 678 1042 mgorman 104 256 mingo 58 192 paulmck 176 68 peterz 226 511 rostedt 123 178 shuahkh 53 6 tglx 200 287 torvalds 64 89 tytso 37 77 viro 350 256 And for the last 10,000 commits in the log, that script has observed 10,783 issues. It'll be interesting to hear from these people about their view of checkpatch, but IMO when on average there are more issues than commits I can suggest two possible causes: 1. People are used to ignore checkpatch warnings. 2. People aren't using checkpatch. Can you really make the claim that this is how checkpatch is supposed to be working? -- Thanks, Sasha
