On 28/08/2016 at 18:37:59 -0400, Levin, Alexander via Ksummit-discuss wrote : > 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. >
Well, Arnd is used to move around old code when refactoring. As the code just moves, he rarely solves checkpatch issues when doing so which is the right thing to do. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
