lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectExpanding checkpatch for non-linux (specifically U-Boot) use
Hi all,

There has been a bit of discussion lately on the U-Boot mailing list
regarding the use of checkpatch for U-Boot patches (see
http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2011-April/090954.html)

U-Boot uses the Linux coding style and checkpatch is therefore a very good
tool for us to use to check style compliance. However, checkpatch has a few
Linux specific checks which throw up false warnings for U-Boot patches like:

WARNING: consider using kstrto* in preference to simple_strto*
WARNING: Use #include <linux/$file> instead of <asm/$file>

Also, checkpatch seems to be checking not only patched lines, but context
lines as well. There is a policy for U-Boot patches to not intermix
whitespace / code cleanup changes and functional changes in in the same
patch. So to achieve zero warnings and errors, the submitter is forced to
create an additional code-cleanup patch in addition to the functionality
patch. The code cleanup can end up being significantly larger than the
functionality change which discourages casual submitters.

So I have a pretty simple question to ask of LKML - Will checkpatch patches
to create a 'U-Boot' command-line option to explicitly filter out Linux
specific warnings and errors ever be accepted into checkpatch, or will we
be required to create and maintain a U-Boot specific version?

P.S. If you could please keep the U-Boot mailing list Cc'd, that would be
appreciated

Regards,

Graeme







\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-04-25 07:39    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site