On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Thursday 13 October 2011 13:25:51 Joe Hershberger wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 21:41:19 Joe Hershberger wrote: >> >> --- /dev/null >> >> +++ b/.checkpatch.conf >> >> >> >> +# Not Linux, so don't expect a Linux tree. >> >> +--no-tree >> >> Why depend on or have to specify where a linux tree is for building u-boot? > > that's not how it works. use the u-boot tree as the "linux" tree. > >> > the only things checkpatch.pl uses $tree for, i think we want. like >> > #include asm/foo.h instead of linux/foo.h. why do you want this ? >> > >> >> +# For Linux includes >> >> +--ignore ARCH_INCLUDE_LINUX >> >> +--ignore INCLUDE_LINUX >> > >> > i think these checks are good actually. we import headers from Linux all >> > the time ... >> >> These seem to be irrelevant if --no-tree is specified. It doesn't >> seem like checkpatch would make good decisions about this anyway given >> that an include file that exists in the referred-to Linux tree may not >> exist in the u-boot tree. > > use the u-boot tree, then it works fine
With the latest version of checkpatch that does not work... checkpatch looks for the following files/folders to identify the top_of_kernel_tree: "COPYING", "CREDITS", "Kbuild", "MAINTAINERS", "Makefile", "README", "Documentation", "arch", "include", "drivers", "fs", "init", "ipc", "kernel", "lib", "scripts", u-boot has no Kbuild, Documentation, init, ipc, kernel, or scripts. -Joe _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot