On Monday, August 29, 2016 9:15:15 AM CEST Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> >
> > 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.
I don't find checkpatch.pl overly useful for my own patches and rarely
run it. I looked over the last few hundred commits and found that almost
all the warnings were for:
- having overly long lines in commit messages when I quoted a long
compiler warning. I generally don't wrap those to make it easier to
search for the warnings in the git history
- missing the word "commit" before a reference to another changeset
in full-text. I'll change that in the future if that makes people
happy, but it doesn't seem important.
- existing style issues that I did not fix when fixing a bug. In many
cases I find it better not to change coding style while fixing
a bug, but there are other cases in which I do.
Arnd
