From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Uses of srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() are better
served by the new srcu_read_lock_fast() and srcu_read_unlock_fast() APIs.
As in srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() would never have
happened had I thought a bit harder a few months ago. T
From: "Paul E. McKenney"
Uses of srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() are better
served by the new srcu_read_lock_fast() and srcu_read_unlock_fast() APIs.
As in srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() would never have
happened had I thought a bit harder a few months ago. T
Uses of srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() are better
served by the new srcu_read_lock_fast() and srcu_read_unlock_fast() APIs.
As in srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() would never have
happened had I thought a bit harder a few months ago. Therefore, mark
them depreca
On Mon, 2025-03-31 at 14:03 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Uses of srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() are better
> served by the new srcu_read_lock_fast() and srcu_read_unlock_fast() APIs.
> As in srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() would never have
> happened had I t
s to prevent
> > > > other instances from being added.
> > >
> > > If those are changed, why not remove the prototypes & functions too?
> > > That would stop more instances being added no?
> >
> > Deprecating it for a cy
convert the 3 existing instances?
> > >
> > > Both are needed. The point of these checkpatch.pl changes is to prevent
> > > other instances from being added.
> >
> > If those are changed, why not remove the prototypes & functions too?
> > That would
On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 08:48:44PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-04-01 at 07:05 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 11:53:25PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2025-03-31 at 14:03 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > Uses of srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_
On Tue, 2025-04-01 at 07:05 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 11:53:25PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2025-03-31 at 14:03 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Uses of srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() are better
> > > served by the new srcu_read_lock_
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 11:53:25PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-03-31 at 14:03 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Uses of srcu_read_lock_lite() and srcu_read_unlock_lite() are better
> > served by the new srcu_read_lock_fast() and srcu_read_unlock_fast() APIs.
> > As in srcu_read_lock_l
On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 07:56:51AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-01-08 at 11:24 -0800, David Reaver wrote:
> > The deprecated_apis map was created in [1] so checkpatch would flag
> > deprecated RCU APIs. These deprecated APIs have since been removed from the
> &g
On Wed, 2025-01-08 at 11:24 -0800, David Reaver wrote:
> The deprecated_apis map was created in [1] so checkpatch would flag
> deprecated RCU APIs. These deprecated APIs have since been removed from the
> kernel. This patch removes them from this map so checkpatch doesn't waste
>
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 11:24:54AM -0800, David Reaver wrote:
> The deprecated_apis map was created in [1] so checkpatch would flag
> deprecated RCU APIs. These deprecated APIs have since been removed from the
> kernel. This patch removes them from this map so checkpatch doesn'
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 11:24:54AM -0800, David Reaver wrote:
> The deprecated_apis map was created in [1] so checkpatch would flag
> deprecated RCU APIs. These deprecated APIs have since been removed from the
> kernel. This patch removes them from this map so checkpatch doesn'
The deprecated_apis map was created in [1] so checkpatch would flag
deprecated RCU APIs. These deprecated APIs have since been removed from the
kernel. This patch removes them from this map so checkpatch doesn't waste
time looking for them, and so readers of checkpatch looking for deprecated
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 10:51:22AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 11:04 -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > vmalloc() and vzalloc() functions have now 2-factor multiplication
> > argument forms vmalloc_array() and vcalloc(), correspondingly.
>
> > Add alloc-with-multiplies che
On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 11:04 -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> vmalloc() and vzalloc() functions have now 2-factor multiplication
> argument forms vmalloc_array() and vcalloc(), correspondingly.
> Add alloc-with-multiplies checks for these new functions.
>
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/i
vmalloc() and vzalloc() functions have now 2-factor multiplication
argument forms vmalloc_array() and vcalloc(), correspondingly.
Add alloc-with-multiplies checks for these new functions.
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/342
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 19:57 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> The devm_ variant of 'kcalloc()' and 'kmalloc_array()' are not tested
> Add the corresponding check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET
> ---
> v2: use a cleaner regex as proposed by Joe Perches
Acked-by: Joe Perches
> ---
> sc
Le 16/04/2021 à 19:03, Joe Perches a écrit :
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 18:51 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
Le 16/04/2021 à 18:11, Joe Perches a écrit :
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 17:58 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
The devm_ variant of 'kcalloc()' and 'kmalloc_array()' are not tested
Add the corr
The devm_ variant of 'kcalloc()' and 'kmalloc_array()' are not tested
Add the corresponding check.
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET
---
v2: use a cleaner regex as proposed by Joe Perches
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/scripts/checkp
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 18:51 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 16/04/2021 à 18:11, Joe Perches a écrit :
> > On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 17:58 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> > > The devm_ variant of 'kcalloc()' and 'kmalloc_array()' are not tested
> > > Add the corresponding check.
> > []
> > > di
Le 16/04/2021 à 18:11, Joe Perches a écrit :
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 17:58 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
The devm_ variant of 'kcalloc()' and 'kmalloc_array()' are not tested
Add the corresponding check.
[]
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
@@ -7006,9 +7006,9 @@
On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 17:58 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> The devm_ variant of 'kcalloc()' and 'kmalloc_array()' are not tested
> Add the corresponding check.
[]
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> @@ -7006,9 +7006,9 @@ sub process {
> }
>
>
> #
The devm_ variant of 'kcalloc()' and 'kmalloc_array()' are not tested
Add the corresponding check.
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 44b9dc330ac6.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2021, tawahpeggy wrote:
> remove one empty line.CHECK: Please don't use multiple blank lines
Did something go wrong with the patch generation? You say that you are
removing one line, but the diff information looks like you are adding a
file. Normally a patch has only the chang
On 11/04/2021 21:49, tawahpeggy wrote:
remove one empty line.CHECK: Please don't use multiple blank lines
Signed-off-by: tawahpeggy
---
drivers/staging/comedi/comedi_pcmcia.mod.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 0 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 drivers/staging/comedi/comedi_pcmcia.m
On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 04:49:38PM -0400, tawahpeggy wrote:
> remove one empty line.CHECK: Please don't use multiple blank lines
>
> Signed-off-by: tawahpeggy
>
> ---
> drivers/staging/comedi/comedi_pcmcia.mod.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 0 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 driver
remove one empty line.CHECK: Please don't use multiple blank lines
Signed-off-by: tawahpeggy
---
drivers/staging/comedi/comedi_pcmcia.mod.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 0 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 drivers/staging/comedi/comedi_pcmcia.mod.c
diff --git a/drivers/staging/comedi/co
Script checkpatch with --strict option gives message:
CHECK: Avoid CamelCase:
CHECK: Avoid CamelCase:
Fix this by removing CamelCase usage. No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Swapnil Jakhade
---
drivers/phy/cadence/phy-cadence-torrent.c | 24 +++
1 file changed, 12
>
> Exclude those so that they can pass checkpatch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Mailhol
Acked-by: Joe Perches
> ---
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index
__must_be_array, offsetof, sizeof_field and __stringify are all
preprocessor macros and do not evaluate their arguments. As such, it
is safe not to warn when arguments are being reused in those four
sub-expressions.
Exclude those so that they can pass checkpatch.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Mailhol
return sysfs_emit() uses should include a newline.
Suggest adding a newline when one is missing.
Add one using --fix too.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 11 +++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index d67
Allow to override this via the PYTHON environment variable.
Some systems still provide Python 2.x under the python name for
compatibility reasons; plus the spdxcheck.py script already specifies
python3 as it's interpreter.
Signed-off-by: Ismael Luceno
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 5 +++--
1 file
this patchset fixes, where possible, some checkpatch errors on macros.
Delete unused macros and some unused struct fields tied
to removed macros.
Changes in v2:
- deleted unused macros
- ignored following checkpatch issues on macro:
* issues requiring to add
Fix all checkpatch errors on macros but the following:
ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses
#41: FILE: drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/include/hal_pwr_seq.h:41:
+#define RTL8723B_TRANS_CARDEMU_TO_ACT
Goto labels are commonly written in the leftmost column (sometimes with
one space in front), regardless of indentation level. Sometimes they're
on a line of their own, but sometimes the same line is shared with a
normal code statement that then starts at the expected indentation
level. When checkin
The preprocessor guard tracking in ctx_statement_block() is (and seems
to have always been) subtly broken whenever tracking over an #else: the
code is supposed to restore state from the current top of the stack
(like and #endif just without removing it). However, it indexes the
stack at [$#stack -
Dwaipayan Ray writes:
> All the error message types now have a verbose description.
>
> Also there are two new groups of message types:
>
> - Macros, Attributes and Symbols
> - Functions and Variables
>
> Rearrange the message types to fit these new groups as needed.
>
> Reviewed-by: Lukas Bulwah
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 04:28:51AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>
> Actually, these would seem to be better as one or multiple functions with
> local statics or even as static inlines functions in the .h file
>
> $ git grep -w RTW_WPA_OUI drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core
> drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/co
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 01:56:27PM +0100, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> Fix extern declaration issues warned by checkpatch.
Nit, we have a new mailing list, you might want to use that now instead
of driverdev in the future, thanks!
greg k-h
Fix extern declaration issues warned by checkpatch.
Changes in v2:
- removal of prototypes when function can be static
- move of static function defs inside file to let the code compile
- split last patch in two patches (one patch for blank line removal)
Fabio Aiuto (9
Fix extern declaration issues warned by checkpatch
Fabio Aiuto (11):
staging: rtl8723bs: delete extern declarations in core/rtw_ap.c
staging: rtl8723bs: moved function prototypes out of core/rtw_efuse.c
staging: rtl8723bs: moved function prototype out of
core/rtw_ioctl_set.c and core
All the error message types now have a verbose description.
Also there are two new groups of message types:
- Macros, Attributes and Symbols
- Functions and Variables
Rearrange the message types to fit these new groups as needed.
Reviewed-by: Lukas Bulwahn
Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray
---
Ch
__must_be_array, offsetof, sizeof_field and __stringify are all
preprocessor macros and do not evaluate their arguments. As such, it
is safe not to warn when arguments are being reused in those four
sub-expressions.
Exclude those so that they can pass checkpatch.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Mailhol
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 03:49:12PM +0100, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:59:44AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > here's an issue in checkpatch.pl
> > >
> > > $ perl script/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/stagin
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:59:44AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > here's an issue in checkpatch.pl
> >
> > $ perl script/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c
> >
> > I get three warning related to an extern
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 04:28:51AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2021-03-20 at 11:59 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > here's an issue in checkpatch.pl
> > >
> > > $ perl script/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/staging/rtl87
On Sat, 2021-03-20 at 11:59 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > here's an issue in checkpatch.pl
> >
> > $ perl script/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c
> >
> > I get three warning related to an extern declar
Hi,
here's an issue in checkpatch.pl
$ perl script/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c
I get three warning related to an extern declaration
WARNING: externs should be avoided in .c files
#14: FILE: drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c:14:
+extern unsigned char WMM_OUI[];
On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> here's an issue in checkpatch.pl
>
> $ perl script/checkpatch.pl -f drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c
>
> I get three warning related to an extern declaration
>
> WARNING: externs should be avoided in .c files
> #14: F
include/asm/ got removed over a decade back. checkpatch
still has a check for it: MODIFIED_INCLUDE_ASM
Remove the check as it is no longer useful.
Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 4
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 10:33 PM Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 5:47 PM Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > include/asm/ got removed a long time back (probably v1.1.45).
> > Checkpatch still worries about that:
> >
> > if (
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 5:47 PM Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
>
> Hello,
> include/asm/ got removed a long time back (probably v1.1.45).
> Checkpatch still worries about that:
>
> if ($realfile =~ m@^include/asm/@) {
> ERROR("MODIFIED_INCLUDE_ASM",
> "do
Hello,
include/asm/ got removed a long time back (probably v1.1.45).
Checkpatch still worries about that:
if ($realfile =~ m@^include/asm/@) {
ERROR("MODIFIED_INCLUDE_ASM",
"do not modify files in include/asm, change architecture specific
files in include/asm-\n" . "$he
ike to see what is being
fixed in the subject line.
Can you update the subject line. The current one doesn't say anything
about the nature of the fix.
Also please run the checkpatch script on your patches. This tool useful
and can offer you tips on improving your commit log as well as code.
thanks,
-- Shuah
__must_be_array, offsetof, sizeof_field and __stringify are all
preprocessor macros and do not evaluate their arguments. As such, it
is safe not to warn when arguments are being reused in those four
sub-expressions.
Exclude those so that they can pass checkpatch.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Mailhol
On 3/3/21 9:35 PM, Lucas Stankus wrote:
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 12:56:05PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
Did you change anything other than fixing the Signed-off-by that Shuah
requested?
No, I only fixed the Signed-off-by warning.
Generally when you make a small change after receiving a Revi
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 12:56:05PM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> Did you change anything other than fixing the Signed-off-by that Shuah
> requested?
No, I only fixed the Signed-off-by warning.
> Generally when you make a small change after receiving a Reviewed-by
> (especially one so small as h
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 6:03 PM Lucas Stankus wrote:
>
> Tidy up code by fixing the following checkpatch warnings:
> CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
> CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
>
> Signed-off-by: Lucas Stankus
Did you change anything othe
Tidy up code by fixing the following checkpatch warnings:
CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
Signed-off-by: Lucas Stankus
---
Change log v1 -> v2
fixed signed-off-by tag
lib/kunit/assert.c | 31 ---
1
Joe Perches writes:
> On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 14:22 -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> Dwaipayan Ray writes:
>>
>> > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
>> > descriptions are read from the new checkpatch documentation
>> > file at `Docu
On 2/26/21 2:05 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 12:54 PM Lucas Pires Stankus
wrote:
Tidy up code by fixing the following checkpatch warnings:
CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
Signed-off-by: Lucas Stankus
R
On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 14:22 -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Dwaipayan Ray writes:
>
> > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
> > descriptions are read from the new checkpatch documentation
> > file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`, which
&
Dwaipayan Ray writes:
> Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
> descriptions are read from the new checkpatch documentation
> file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`, which
> is also added by this series.
So I can certainly take the doc change, as requested
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 12:54 PM Lucas Pires Stankus
wrote:
>
> Tidy up code by fixing the following checkpatch warnings:
> CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
> CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
>
> Signed-off-by: Lucas Stankus
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins
Thanks!
Tidy up code by fixing the following checkpatch warnings:
CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
CHECK: Lines should not end with a '('
Signed-off-by: Lucas Stankus
---
lib/kunit/assert.c | 31 ---
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > > > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
> > > > descriptions are read from the checkpatch documentation
> > > > file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`.
> > > >
> > > > The verbose mode is optional and can be
From: Lukas Bulwahn
As discussed, Dwaipayan and Lukas take the responsibility for maintaining
the checkpatch documentation that is currently being built up.
To be sure that the checkpatch maintainers and the corresponding
documentation maintainers can keep the content synchronized, add them as
Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additional verbose
test descriptions. The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled
by the flag -v or --verbose.
The test descriptions are parsed from the checkpatch documentation
file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`. The test
Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
descriptions are read from the new checkpatch documentation
file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`, which
is also added by this series.
The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled by the
flag -v or --verbose.
The documentation
Add documentation for kernel script checkpatch.pl.
This documentation is also parsed by checkpatch to
enable a verbose mode.
The checkpatch message types are grouped by usage. Under
each group the types are described briefly. 34 of such
types are documented.
Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 11:29 AM Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 7:08 PM Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:03 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 13:22 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > >
>
> > I could take it up if everybody is okay with it!
> >
> >> Ideally, the patch order would be reversed so the .rst file
> >> is added first, then checkpatch updated to use it.
> >>
> >
> > Sure, if Jonathan or Mauro has no objections to it, I
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 12:10 PM Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
>
> As discussed, Dwaipayan and Lukas take the responsibility for maintaining
> the checkpatch documentation that is currently being built up.
>
> To be sure that the checkpatch maintainers and the corresponding
> documentati
As discussed, Dwaipayan and Lukas take the responsibility for maintaining
the checkpatch documentation that is currently being built up.
To be sure that the checkpatch maintainers and the corresponding
documentation maintainers can keep the content synchronized, add them as
reviewers to the
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 7:08 PM Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:03 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 13:22 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
> > > descriptions are re
might have
>> some opinion.
>>
>> Also I do not want to be a maintainer of this .rst file and
>> likely neither Jon nor Mauro would either. Perhaps you?
>>
>
> I could take it up if everybody is okay with it!
>
>> Ideally, the patch order would be reverse
Em Thu, 25 Feb 2021 23:38:03 +0530
Dwaipayan Ray escreveu:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:03 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 13:22 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
> > > descript
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:03 PM Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 13:22 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
> > descriptions are read from the checkpatch documentation
> > file at `Documentation/dev-tools/chec
On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 13:22 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
> descriptions are read from the checkpatch documentation
> file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`.
>
> The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled by t
On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 13:14 -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> Would it be possible to teach checkpatch not to warn about
> canonical references to earlier commits? E.g.
>
> WARNING: Possible unwrapped commit description (prefer a maximum 75 chars per
> line)
> #7:
> commit e80
Would it be possible to teach checkpatch not to warn about
canonical references to earlier commits? E.g.
WARNING: Possible unwrapped commit description (prefer a maximum 75 chars per
line)
#7:
commit e80634a75aba ("EDAC, skx: Retrieve and print retry_rd_err_log registers")
Thanks
-Tony
From: Felipe Balbi
commit 2a499b45295206e7f3dc76edadde891c06cc4447 upstream
no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi
Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/drivers
From: Felipe Balbi
commit 2a499b45295206e7f3dc76edadde891c06cc4447 upstream
no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi
Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/drivers
From: Felipe Balbi
commit 2a499b45295206e7f3dc76edadde891c06cc4447 upstream
no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi
Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/drivers
From: Felipe Balbi
commit 2a499b45295206e7f3dc76edadde891c06cc4447 upstream
no functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi
Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/ulpi.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/drivers
Add documentation for kernel script checkpatch.pl.
This documentation is also parsed by checkpatch to
enable a verbose mode.
The checkpatch message types are grouped by usage. Under
each group the types are described briefly. 34 of such
types are documented.
Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray
Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additional verbose
test descriptions. The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled
by the flag -v or --verbose.
The test descriptions are parsed from the checkpatch documentation
file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`. The test
Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
descriptions are read from the checkpatch documentation
file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`.
The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled by the
flag -v or --verbose.
The documentation file is only parsed by checkpatch.pl
if
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 8:14 AM Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 00:05 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 11:36 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 2021-02-21 at 17:28 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additi
On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 00:05 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 11:36 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 2021-02-21 at 17:28 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additional verbose
> > > test descriptions. The verbose mode is optio
On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 11:36 PM Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2021-02-21 at 17:28 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> > Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additional verbose
> > test descriptions. The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled
> > by the flag -v or --verbose.
>
> OK, may
On Sun, 2021-02-21 at 17:28 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additional verbose
> test descriptions. The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled
> by the flag -v or --verbose.
OK, maybe add color coding to the list_types output.
Something like:
---
Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additional verbose
test descriptions. The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled
by the flag -v or --verbose.
The test descriptions are parsed from the checkpatch documentation
file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`. The test
Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
descriptions are read from the checkpatch documentation
file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`.
The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled by the
flag -v or --verbose.
The documentation file is only parsed by checkpatch.pl
if
Add documentation for kernel script checkpatch.pl.
This documentation is also parsed by checkpatch to
enable a verbose mode.
The checkpatch message types are grouped by usage. Under
each group the types are described briefly. 34 of such
types are documented.
Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray
Add missing blank line after declarations.
Signed-off-by: Hassan Shahbazi
---
lib/genalloc.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/lib/genalloc.c b/lib/genalloc.c
index dab97bb69df6..3e901fd93b00 100644
--- a/lib/genalloc.c
+++ b/lib/genalloc.c
@@ -757,6 +757,7 @@ unsigned long gen
On Sat, 2021-02-20 at 17:32 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch. The verbose test
> descriptions are read from the checkpatch documentation
> file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`.
>
> The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled by t
Add documentation for kernel script checkpatch.pl.
This documentation is also parsed by checkpatch to
enable a verbose mode.
The checkpatch message types are grouped by usage. Under
each group the types are described briefly. 34 of such
types are documented.
Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray
Add a new verbose mode to checkpatch.pl to emit additional verbose
test descriptions. The verbose mode is optional and can be enabled
by the flag -v or --verbose.
The test descriptions are parsed from the checkpatch documentation
file at `Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst`. The test
1 - 100 of 2936 matches
Mail list logo
