Hi Andrew,
On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 9:18 PM Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 May 2020 15:26:13 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert+rene...@glider.be> wrote:
> > While "git am" can apply an mbox file containing multiple patches (e.g.
> > as created by b4[1], or a patch bundle downloaded from patchwork),
> > checkpatch does not have proper support for that. When operating on an
> > mbox, checkpatch will merge all detected tags, and complain falsely
> > about duplicates:
> >
> > WARNING: Duplicate signature
> >
> > As modifying checkpatch to reset state in between each patch is a lot of
> > work, a simple solution is splitting the mbox into individual patches,
> > and invoking checkpatch for each of them. Fortunately checkpatch can read
> > a patch from stdin, so the classic "formail" tool can be used to split
> > the mbox, and pipe all individual patches to checkpatch:
> >
> > formail -s scripts/checkpatch.pl < my-mbox
> >
> > However, when reading a patch file from standard input, checkpatch calls
> > it "Your patch", and reports its state as:
> >
> > Your patch has style problems, please review.
> >
> > or:
> >
> > Your patch has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
>
> Showing the proposed "after patch" output would be helpful. It seems
> that it will be
>
> "checkpatch: use patch subject when reading from stdin" has no
> obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
>
> yes?
Almost right:
"[PATCH v2] checkpatch: use patch subject when reading from stdin" has
no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
