On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 10:10 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 07:01:37 -0700 > Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote: > > > o Please add a test for $realfile !~ m@kernel/trace/@ > > or maybe $realfile !~ /(?:trace|tracing)/ > > o ERROR seems a bit strong, WARN is probably good enough > > I'm thinking ERROR is good. There's no reason to have it. In fact, you > must never have it. Looking at the other ERROR() conditions, I say this
Look at trace_printk in fs/ext4/inline.c It's in a section guarded by a CONFIG_FOO_DEBUG block. Is the use there an error? Perhaps not and I think it better if checkpatch ERROR messages are more definitive. > is just as strong and perhaps even stronger. You have ERROR() for > trailing white space. This is much worse than that. I'm not much of a fan of that one, nor of most of the ERROR uses in checkpatch actually. I think it might be better if all of the checkpatch whitespace/style related messages were WARN not ERROR. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
