You mean I can ignore the following warnings?
"
checkpatch:
ERROR: Author Peng He <xnhp0...@gmail.com> needs to sign off.
WARNING: Unexpected sign-offs from developers who are not authors or
co-authors or committers: Peng He <hepeng.0...@bytedance.com>
Lines checked: 98, Warnings: 1, Errors: 1
"
Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> 于2022年5月17日周二 14:26写道：
>
>
> On 17 May 2022, at 7:49, Peng He wrote:
>
> > The only issue I have is that I have to use the company's email address
> to
> > submit patches
> > while I am using the personal email to subscribe to the maillist.
> >
> > So the bot will always warn about the author needing to sign-off.
> > Perhaps in the future I would use both email addresses to avoid this
> > warning.
>
> There is this error on patch 1/3:
>
> ERROR: Co-author Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> needs to sign off.
>
> So I guess you need to add my sign-off also in that patch.
> >
> >
> > Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> 于2022年5月16日周一 19:36写道：
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 16 May 2022, at 12:19, Peng He wrote:
> >>
> >>> Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> 于2022年5月16日周一 17:12写道：
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 14 May 2022, at 10:40, Peng He wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Peng He <hepeng.0...@bytedance.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> utilities/checkpatch.py | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> >>>>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/utilities/checkpatch.py b/utilities/checkpatch.py
> >>>>> index 8c7faa419..67c517b69 100755
> >>>>> --- a/utilities/checkpatch.py
> >>>>> +++ b/utilities/checkpatch.py
> >>>>> @@ -619,6 +619,8 @@ def regex_function_factory(func_name):
> >>>>> def regex_error_factory(description):
> >>>>> return lambda: print_error(description)
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Need extra newline, install flake8 and you will get the error at
> compile
> >>>> time.
> >>>>
> >>>>> +def regex_warn_factory(description):
> >>>>> + return lambda: print_warning(description)
> >>>>
> >>>> Need extra newline, install flake8 and you will get the error at
> compile
> >>>> time.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> std_functions = [
> >>>>> ('malloc', 'Use xmalloc() in place of malloc()'),
> >>>>> @@ -636,6 +638,7 @@ std_functions = [
> >>>>> ('assert', 'Use ovs_assert() in place of assert()'),
> >>>>> ('error', 'Use ovs_error() in place of error()'),
> >>>>> ]
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> checks += [
> >>>>> {'regex': r'(\.c|\.h)(\.in)?$',
> >>>>> 'match_name': None,
> >>>>> @@ -644,6 +647,21 @@ checks += [
> >>>>> 'print': regex_error_factory(description)}
> >>>>> for (function_name, description) in std_functions]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +experimental_api = [
> >>>>
> >>>> I do not think this is an experimental API, I would call it something
> >> like
> >>>> a suspicious API maybe?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> or change to easy_to_misused_api?
> >>
> >> This is fine by me to.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>> + ('ovsrcu_barrier',
> >>>>> + 'lib/ovs-rcu.c',
> >>>>> + 'Are you sure you need to use ovsrcu_barrier(),'
> >>>>
> >>>> Here you need to add a space at the end, as the error message now
> looks
> >>>> like:
> >>>>
> >>>> WARNING: Are you sure you need to use ovsrcu_barrier(),in most cases
> >>>> ovsrcu_synchronize() will be fine?
> >>>>
> >>>>> + 'in most cases ovsrcu_synchronize() will be fine?'),
> >>>>> + ]
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +checks += [
> >>>>> + {'regex': r'(\.c)(\.in)?$',
> >>>>> + 'match_name': lambda x: x != location,
> >>>>> + 'prereq': lambda x: not is_comment_line(x),
> >>>>> + 'check': regex_function_factory(function_name),
> >>>>> + 'print': regex_warn_factory(description)}
> >>>>> + for (function_name, location, description) in experimental_api]
> >>>>> +
> >>>>>
> >>>>> def regex_operator_factory(operator):
> >>>>> regex = re.compile(r'^[^#][^"\']*[^ "]%s[^ "\'][^"]*' %
> operator)
> >>>>> @@ -676,12 +694,20 @@ def get_file_type_checks(filename):
> >>>>> global checks
> >>>>> checkList = []
> >>>>> for check in checks:
> >>>>> + regex_check = True
> >>>>> + match_check = True
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> if check['regex'] is None and check['match_name'] is None:
> >>>>> checkList.append(check)
> >>>>> + continue
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> if check['regex'] is not None and \
> >>>>> - re.compile(check['regex']).search(filename) is not None:
> >>>>> - checkList.append(check)
> >>>>> - elif check['match_name'] is not None and
> >>>> check['match_name'](filename):
> >>>>> + re.compile(check['regex']).search(filename) is None:
> >>>>> + regex_check = False
> >>>>> + elif check['match_name'] is not None and not
> >>>> check['match_name'](filename):
> >>>>
> >>>> Line is too long so you need to break it up:
> >>>>
> >>>> utilities/checkpatch.py:709:80: E501 line too long (83 > 79
> characters)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> + match_check = False
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + if regex_check and match_check:
> >>>>> checkList.append(check)
> >>>>
> >>>> Would it not make more sense to re-write the above elif cases to a
> >> single
> >>>> case?
> >>>>
> >>>>> return checkList
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> 2.25.1
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> will send a new version， thanks for the detailed review.
> >>
> >> You can also add my Signed-off-by: if you make the suggested changes to
> >> keep the robot happy.
> >>
> >> //Eelco
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > hepeng
>
>
--
hepeng
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
