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    [W:0.023 / U:0.284 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site