lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/5] checkpatch: add a blacklist
Date
Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com> writes:

> This thread is specifically about checkpatch errors .. checkpatch
> warnings can be ignored, but errors you can't usually ignore..

Of course I can and do :-)

> If your
> ignoring errors then either checkpatch is producing bogus output that
> needs to be corrected, or it's something you really should fix..

Neither.
But unfortunately I don't have examples handy.

My POV must be a bit different: I treat errors like another class of
warnings (perhaps more important that "mere" warnings but still not
authoritative).

This is BTW precisely what is needed WRT to that chunk of code
(include/trace/events/ext4.h, I assume checkpatch produces "error"
there) - though I think I'd format it a bit differently.


Perhaps checkpatch should stop producing "errors" (which are meaningless
as checkpatch has no authority to veto anything - a human has to decide)
and should simply give some severity code?
OTOH I ignore error/warning distinction completely, perhaps the
distinction is bogus? Not sure.
--
Krzysztof Halasa


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-07 12:21    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site