On Wednesday, April 20, 2011, Graeme Russ <graeme.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, April 20, 2011, Detlev Zundel <d...@denx.de> wrote: >> Hi, >> > >> >> As a base for discussion, what about this: >> >> Use common sense in interpreting the results of checkpatch. Warnings >> that clearly only make sense in the Linux kernel can be ignored. Also >> warnings produced for _context lines_ rather than actual changes can >> also be ignored. > > One man's common sense is another's idiocy > > I vote for a zero warnings, zero errors U-Boot specific checkpatch >
I also think that all patches should be submitted with a checkpatch summary with an explaination for any errors or warnings - this will at least save a little effort for the maintainers and reduce the number of patches bounced only to have the checkpatch problems argued away by the author anyway Regards, Graeme _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
