On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 05:38 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
> Presence of hexadecimal address or symbol results in false warning
> message by checkpatch.pl.
>
> For example, running checkpatch on commit b8ad540dd4e4 ("mptcp: fix
> memory leak in mptcp_subflow_create_socket()") results in warning:
On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 02:27 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> Also I tried the pattern attr =~ s/^_*(.*)_*$/$1/
> for trimming the _ earlier. I think it doesn't trim the
> trailing underscores in the suffix as (.*) captures everything greedily.
>
> Is the iterative one perhaps okay instead?
>
On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 00:44 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> Hi,
Hi again.
> I modified the check to check the attributes from the map.
> There are two checks - one for the normal attributes and
> one for the ones with arguments, which needs just a bit more
> processing.
>
> So attributes like
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 21:06 +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2020, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
> > A quick evaluation on v5.6..v5.8 showed that this fix reduces
> > REPEATED_WORD warnings from 2797 to 907.
> >
> > A quick manual check found all cases are related to hex output or
> > list
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 11:22 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 18:32:48 +0200
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
>
> > The include/linux/genalloc.h file defined this typedef:
> >
> > typedef unsigned long (*genpool_algo_t)(unsigned long *map,unsigned
> > long size,unsigned
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix
>
> This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> I am wondering if the change could be one mega patch (see below) or
> normal patch per file about 100 patches or somewhere half way by collecting
> early
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 17:10 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 4:34 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 15:13 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > It is generally preferred that the macros from
> > > include/linux/compi
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 15:13 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> It is generally preferred that the macros from
> include/linux/compiler_attributes.h are used, unless there
> is a reason not to.
>
> Checkpatch currently checks __attribute__ for each of
checkpatch, no need for capitalization
and
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 08:08 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 4:36 AM Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > Use a more generic form for __section that requires quotes to avoid
> > complications with clang and gcc differences.
>
> I performed vi
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 08:08 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 4:36 AM Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > Use a more generic form for __section that requires quotes to avoid
> > complications with clang and gcc differences.
>
> I performed vi
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 02:35 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> On 23/10/20 1:03 am, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 00:44 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> > > On 22/10/20 9:40 pm, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:20 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
>
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 13:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> .On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 7:36 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > Use a more generic form for __section that requires quotes to avoid
> > complications with clang and gcc differences.
[]
> > a quick test of x86_64 and s390 w
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 13:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> .On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 7:36 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > Use a more generic form for __section that requires quotes to avoid
> > complications with clang and gcc differences.
[]
> > a quick test of x86_64 and s390 w
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 00:44 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> On 22/10/20 9:40 pm, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:20 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
> > > Presence of hexadecimal address or symbol results in false warning
> > > message by checkpatch.pl.
> &
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:49 +0200, Łukasz Stelmach wrote:
> Ignore autogenerated CamelCase-like defines and enum values like
> DRM_MODE_CONNECTOR_Unknown or ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_Asym_Pause_BIT.
>
> Syggested-by: Joe Perches
> Signed-off-by: Łukasz Stelmach
> ---
> Changes
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:14 +0200, Lukasz Stelmach wrote:
> It was <2020-10-22 czw 04:57>, when Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 13:01 +0200, Łukasz Stelmach wrote:
> > > Ignore CamelCase constants describing Ethernet link parameters defined
> > >
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 09:33 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 11:58:25AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Like the __section macro, the __alias macro uses
> > macro # stringification to create quotes around
> > the section name used in the __attribu
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:29 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 8:22 PM Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > It is generally preferred that the macros from
> > include/linux/compiler_attributes.h are used, unless there
> > is a reason not to.
[]
> I am a bit worried about the code size
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 20:20 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
> Presence of hexadecimal address or symbol results in false warning
> message by checkpatch.pl.
[]
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> @@ -3051,7 +3051,10 @@ sub process {
> }
>
> # check
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 15:59 +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Runnning ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -g HEAD, I get the following error:
>
> Global symbol "$gitroot" requires explicit package name at
> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl line 980.
> Execution of ./scripts/checkpatch.pl aborted due to
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 19:51 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> > > Alright Sir.
Joe is fine, sir isn't necessary.
> Hi Sir
> I have implemented my solution. Should I send the patch in reply to
> this mail or as a different mail? Also should I label it as v2? I have
> also addressed the warnings out of list
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 13:01 +0200, Łukasz Stelmach wrote:
> Ignore CamelCase constants describing Ethernet link parameters defined
> in include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h.
[]
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> @@ -5295,6 +5295,10 @@ sub process {
> #CamelCase
>
ction("foo"))) uses to __section("foo")
even if the __attribute__ has multiple list entry forms.
Conversion done using a script:
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/75393e5ddc272dc7403de74d645e6c6e0f4e70eb.ca...@perches.com/2-convert_section.pl
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
ction("foo"))) uses to __section("foo")
even if the __attribute__ has multiple list entry forms.
Conversion done using a script:
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/75393e5ddc272dc7403de74d645e6c6e0f4e70eb.ca...@perches.com/2-convert_section.pl
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 14:35 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 2:20 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > While secure solutions are useful, I really wonder if
> > "George Spelvin" is a real person.
>
> It's not his real name, no, but he's a real person.
&g
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 13:52 -0700, Marc Plumb wrote:
> As one of the participants, I mostly backed off when Spelvin seemed to
> be more aggressively driving a secure solution.
While secure solutions are useful, I really wonder if
"George Spelvin" is a real person.
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 12:26 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> Perhaps a regex for permissions is good enough
> $line !~ /\b[cbdl-][rwxs-]{9,9}\b/
Maybe not completely correct...
>From info ls:
The file type is one of the following characters:
‘-’
regular fil
On Thu, 2020-10-22 at 00:40 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> On 21/10/20 8:48 pm, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 20:31 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
> > > Presence of hexadecimal address or symbol results in false warning
> > > message by checkpatch.pl.
> &
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 21:02 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 20:58, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Like the __section macro, the __alias macro uses
> > macro # stringification to create quotes around
> > the section name used in the __attribute__.
> >
>
Like the __section macro, the __alias macro uses
macro # stringification to create quotes around
the section name used in the __attribute__.
Remove the stringification and add quotes or a
stringification to the uses instead.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
There is a script that might
(adding cc's of kernel-mentees and a few checkpatch contributors)
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 19:54 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 7:42 PM Nick Desaulniers
> wrote:
> > If you used some of the macros from
> > include/linux/compiler_attributes.h like __section and __aligned, I
> >
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 23:25 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> Thanks for your feedback. I ran a manual check using this approach
> over v5.6..v5.8.
> The negatives occurring with this approach are for the word 'be'
> (Frequency 5) and 'add'(Frequency 1). For eg.
>
> WARNING:REPEATED_WORD: Possible repeated
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 22:29 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> Can it be considered that the Hex numbers occur
> mostly in pairs or groups of 8, like "FF" or ""?
>
> I think it might reduce the negative side further.
Maybe. This already looks for pairs.
Combined with your previous patch,
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 08:28 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 08:18 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > I might add that check to the line below where
> > the repeated words are checked against long
> []
> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatc
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 08:18 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> I might add that check to the line below where
> the repeated words are checked against long
[]
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> @@ -3062,6 +3062,7 @@ sub process {
>
>
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 20:31 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
> Presence of hexadecimal address or symbol results in false warning
> message by checkpatch.pl.
>
> For example, running checkpatch on commit b8ad540dd4e4 ("mptcp: fix
> memory leak in mptcp_subflow_create_socket()") results in warning:
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 07:25 +, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> Hello Joe & All,
> On Tue, 2020-10-20 at 11:36 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-10-20 at 11:48 +, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
[]
> > > And for peeps who have not been following - following function
>
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Tue, 2020-10-20 at 11:51 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:42 AM Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > > We probably should add all 3 to W=2 builds (wrapped in cc-option).
> > > I'
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:42 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> > > I am wondering if
On Tue, 2020-10-20 at 11:48 +, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-10-20 at 13:07 +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > Thanks Tom,
> >
> > On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 12:33 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return
> > >
> >
On Tue, 2020-10-20 at 08:00 +, David Laight wrote:
> From: Joe Perches
> > Sent: 19 October 2020 16:47
> > On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 03:13 +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > Hi Ard,
> > >
> > > First bad commit (maybe != root cause):
> > >
es-ce-glue.c:75: WARNING: Move const after static - use
'static const u8'
#75: FILE: arch/arm/crypto/aes-ce-glue.c:75:
+ static u8 const rcon[] = {
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 12
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 16:40 +, Srinivasan Raju wrote:
> > Overall, there are many magic numbers without comments, this makes it hard
> > to
> > understand the code. Using defines with proper naming helps and for 802.11
> > stuff
> > can use ieee80211_*/IEEE80211_* should be used.
>
> Thanks
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 10:54 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> On 10/19/20 10:21, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 17:14 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> > > On 19/10/2020 17:05, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > > From: Tom Rix
> > > >
>
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 10:54 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> On 10/19/20 10:21, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 17:14 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> > > On 19/10/2020 17:05, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > > From: Tom Rix
> > > >
>
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 03:13 +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> Hi Ard,
>
> First bad commit (maybe != root cause):
>
> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
> master
> head: 9d9af1007bc08971953ae915d88dc9bb21344b53
> commit:
switch/case use of break after a return, goto or break is unnecessary.
There is an existing warning for the return and goto uses, so add
break and a --fix option too.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
v2: Add break to matched keyword
and change the message to show the matched keyword
switch/case use of break after a return, goto or break is unnecessary.
There is an existing warning for the return and goto uses, so add
break and a --fix option too.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
v2: Add break to matched keyword
and change the message to show the matched keyword
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 17:14 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> On 19/10/2020 17:05, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > From: Tom Rix
> >
> > A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tom Rix
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> >
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 17:14 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> On 19/10/2020 17:05, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > From: Tom Rix
> >
> > A break is not needed if it is preceded by a return or goto
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tom Rix
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c
> >
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 05:55 -0700, Tom Rix wrote:
> On 10/18/20 1:19 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 13:07 -0700, Tom Rix wrote:
> > > I like!
> > []
> > > could add a '|break' here to catch the couple
> > []
> > > break;
> > &
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 05:55 -0700, Tom Rix wrote:
> On 10/18/20 1:19 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 13:07 -0700, Tom Rix wrote:
> > > I like!
> > []
> > > could add a '|break' here to catch the couple
> > []
> > > break;
> > &
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix
>
> This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> I am wondering if the change could be one mega patch (see below) or
> normal patch per file about 100 patches or somewhere half way by collecting
> early
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Mon, 2020-10-19 at 08:47 +0530, Srinivasan Raju wrote:
> This introduces the pureLiFi LiFi driver for LiFi-X, LiFi-XC
> and LiFi-XL USB devices.
Mostly trivial comments:
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/purelifi/chip.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/purelifi/chip.c
[]
> +int
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 13:07 -0700, Tom Rix wrote:
> I like!
[]
> could add a '|break' here to catch the couple
[]
> break;
>
> break;
Unfortunately, checkpatch is really stupid and it
wouldn't catch those
cases as there are blank lines
between the existing consecutive break
statements.
It would
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 13:07 -0700, Tom Rix wrote:
> I like!
[]
> could add a '|break' here to catch the couple
[]
> break;
>
> break;
Unfortunately, checkpatch is really stupid and it
wouldn't catch those
cases as there are blank lines
between the existing consecutive break
statements.
It would
switch/case use of break after a return or goto is unnecessary.
There is an existing warning for these uses, so add a --fix option too.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
For today's next, this would remove ~300 instances like:
case FOO:
return bar;
break
switch/case use of break after a return or goto is unnecessary.
There is an existing warning for these uses, so add a --fix option too.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
For today's next, this would remove ~300 instances like:
case FOO:
return bar;
break
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see
> >
If set, use the environment variable GIT_DIR to change the
default .git location of the kernel git tree.
If GIT_DIR is unset, keep using the current ".git" default.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
V2: learn to type my own email address...
commit f5f613259f3f ("checkpatch: all
If set, use the environment variable GIT_DIR to change the
default .git location of the kernel git tree.
If GIT_DIR is unset, keep using the current ".git" default.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
commit f5f613259f3f ("checkpatch: allow not using -f with files that are in
git&q
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 20:15 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Joe,
rehi Geert
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 6:07 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 16:03 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
[]
> > > This is now commit f5f613259f3fea81 ("checkpatch: allow not
w warnings of the type:
Andrew, can you pick this up please?
Acked-by: Joe Perches
> WARNING: Possible repeated word: 'git'
>
> For example:
> WARNING: Possible repeated word: 'git'
> +T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rw/uml.git
>
> So, the pattern "
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 16:03 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 2:12 AM Joe Perches wrote:
> > If a file exists in git and checkpatch is used without the -f
> > flag for scanning a file, then checkpatch will scan the file
> > ass
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 12:10 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> print index(" \t.,;?!", '');
>
> It output 0 in my case. So last words on a line seems to work.
> I don't know if this changes with the perl version though.
>
> So given this, will it be necessary to change end_char to ' ' ?
> or perhaps
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 22:19 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 10:03 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 21:57 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > Recently, commit 4f6ad8aa1eac ("checkpatch: move repeated word test")
> > >
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix
>
> This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> I am wondering if the change could be one mega patch (see below) or
> normal patch per file about 100 patches or somewhere half way by collecting
> early
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 20:21 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> > > From: Tom Rix
> > >
> > > This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
>
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix
>
> This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> I am wondering if the change could be one mega patch (see below) or
> normal patch per file about 100 patches or somewhere half way by collecting
> early
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix
>
> This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> I am wondering if the change could be one mega patch (see below) or
> normal patch per file about 100 patches or somewhere half way by collecting
> early
On Sat, 2020-10-17 at 09:09 -0700, t...@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix
>
> This is a upcoming change to clean up a new warning treewide.
> I am wondering if the change could be one mega patch (see below) or
> normal patch per file about 100 patches or somewhere half way by collecting
> early
901 - 1000 of 25402 matches
Mail list logo
