On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:39:58AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 02:11:36PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 21:50 +0100, David Howells wrote: > > > Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > There are many checkpatch rules (like semicolons) that > > > > > are not in CodingStyle. > > > > > > > > It's a rule of thumb, not a mandate. In *general*, checkpatch.pl should > > > > not be enforcing style rules that aren't documented in CodingStyle. > > > > > > Except that it becomes a mandate when someone runs it automatically > > > against > > > every one of your patches and then sends you an email for each patch it > > > finds > > > a checkpatch niggle against... > > > > I think that any robot sending such checkpatch-only > > emails should be disabled. > > > > I know of 2 email robots. > > > > Fengguang Wu's very useful build robot > > sends out emails on build failures. > > I think that's great. > > Thanks! Yes I'm now running checkpatch these days because some people > suggested to me that some of the checkpatch warnings do help catch > real bugs. > > However I do try to avoid upsetting people with maybe-subjective > warnings. A checkpatch report will only be sent when a small fraction > of error types are detected. Comments are very welcome on how to > improve this list: > > MEMSET > IN_ATOMIC > UAPI_INCLUDE > MALFORMED_INCLUDE > SIZEOF_ADDRESS > KREALLOC_ARG_REUSE > EXECUTE_PERMISSIONS > ERROR:BAD_SIGN_OFF > LO_MACRO > HI_MACRO > CSYNC > SSYNC > HOTPLUG_SECTION > INDENTED_LABEL > INLINE_LOCATION > STORAGE_CLASS > USLEEP_RANGE > UNNECESSARY_CASTS > ALLOC_SIZEOF_STRUCT > KREALLOC_ARG_REUSE > USE_FUNC > LOCKDEP > EXPORTED_WORLD_WRITABLE > WHITESPACE_AFTER_LINE_CONTINUATION > MISSING_VMLINUX_SYMBOL > NEEDLESS_IF > PRINTF_L
Looks like you have KREALLOC_ARG_REUSE in that list twice. Other than that, those look sensible. I'd suggest a couple more, which *should* always make sense, and to the best of my knowledge don't tend to generate false positives: C99_COMMENTS CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL CVS_KEYWORD ELSE_AFTER_BRACE GLOBAL_INITIALIZERS INITIALISED_STATIC INVALID_UTF8 LINUX_VERSION_CODE MISSING_EOF_NEWLINE PREFER_SEQ_PUTS PRINTK_WITHOUT_KERN_LEVEL REDUNDANT_CODE RETURN_PARENTHESES SIZEOF_PARENTHESIS SPACE_BEFORE_TAB TRAILING_SEMICOLON TRAILING_WHITESPACE USE_DEVICE_INITCALL USE_RELATIVE_PATH These *ought* to make sense, but I don't know their false positive rates: HEXADECIMAL_BOOLEAN_TEST ALLOC_ARRAY_ARGS CONSIDER_KSTRTO CONST_STRUCT SPLIT_STRING The following almost always make sense, but only on patches not yet applied to a tree: PATCH_PREFIX MODIFIED_INCLUDE_ASM CORRUPTED_PATCH NOT_UNIFIED_DIFF MISSING_SIGN_OFF - Josh Triplett -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
