Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: fix uninitialized var when run with --no-tree

2016-11-08 Thread Brian Norris
On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 03:10:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > I already have the below. Good enough? Sure, good enough. Though it does have the same tiny awkwardness as my v1. > From: Jerome Forissier > Subject: checkpatch: don't try to get maintained status when --no-tree is > given > > F

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: fix uninitialized var when run with --no-tree

2016-11-08 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 19:36:09 -0700 Brian Norris wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 07:26:31PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > > From: Brian Norris > > > > If checkpatch.pl gets copied out of the tree, --no-tree shouldn't start > > complaining: > > > > Use of uninitialized value $root in concaten

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: fix uninitialized var when run with --no-tree

2016-10-28 Thread Brian Norris
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 07:26:31PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > From: Brian Norris > > If checkpatch.pl gets copied out of the tree, --no-tree shouldn't start > complaining: > > Use of uninitialized value $root in concatenation (.) or string at > /path/to/checkpatch.pl line 764. > > Let's j

[PATCH] checkpatch: fix uninitialized var when run with --no-tree

2016-10-28 Thread Brian Norris
From: Brian Norris If checkpatch.pl gets copied out of the tree, --no-tree shouldn't start complaining: Use of uninitialized value $root in concatenation (.) or string at /path/to/checkpatch.pl line 764. Let's just give the safe answer instead -- don't warn about "obsolete" files. Fixes: 8