One possibly common workflow is this:
git format-patch -o mypatches --cover-letter ^start end
./scripts/checkpatch.pl mypatches/*
The problem with the above is that checkpatch.pl will try to
parse the cover-letter, and of course complain that it can not
find any unified diff within.
It is pretty safe for us to assume "0000-cover-letter.patch" is
not in fact a patch and simply skip processing of it.
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <[email protected]>
---
[what I know about perl could be written on the back of a postage
stamp in crayon, so please feel free to reimplement the overall
concept of this change as you see fit.... ]
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index a3b9782..fc22f4b 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
# Licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL License version 2
use strict;
+use File::Basename;
my $P = $0;
$P =~ s@.*/@@g;
@@ -382,6 +383,10 @@ for my $filename (@ARGV) {
open($FILE, '<', "$filename") ||
die "$P: $filename: open failed - $!\n";
}
+ if (basename($filename) eq '0000-cover-letter.patch') {
+ print "Skipping cover letter $filename\n";
+ next;
+ }
if ($filename eq '-') {
$vname = 'Your patch';
} else {
--
1.7.9.1
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:29 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> One possibly common workflow is this:
>
> git format-patch -o mypatches --cover-letter ^start end
> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl mypatches/*
I use a script for this and don't put the check
in checkpatch but put the check in bash.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:29 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
>> One possibly common workflow is this:
>>
>> ? ? ? git format-patch -o mypatches --cover-letter ^start end
>> ? ? ? ./scripts/checkpatch.pl mypatches/*
>
> I use a script for this and don't put the check
> in checkpatch but put the check in bash.
Sure, and I can do the same. But my question to you is whether
you think the above is a common workflow, and if the false positives
that it generates will decrease the number of people likely to make
using it a part of their routine?
Paul.
--
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at ?http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at ?http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:47 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:29 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> >> One possibly common workflow is this:
> >>
> >> git format-patch -o mypatches --cover-letter ^start end
> >> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl mypatches/*
> >
> > I use a script for this and don't put the check
> > in checkpatch but put the check in bash.
>
> Sure, and I can do the same. But my question to you is whether
> you think the above is a common workflow, and if the false positives
> that it generates will decrease the number of people likely to make
> using it a part of their routine?
Dunno. I generally think that tools should report
errors when the input given them is inappropriate.
cheers, Joe
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 04:50:11PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:47 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 19:29 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> > >> One possibly common workflow is this:
> > >>
> > >> git format-patch -o mypatches --cover-letter ^start end
> > >> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl mypatches/*
> > >
> > > I use a script for this and don't put the check
> > > in checkpatch but put the check in bash.
> >
> > Sure, and I can do the same. But my question to you is whether
> > you think the above is a common workflow, and if the false positives
> > that it generates will decrease the number of people likely to make
> > using it a part of their routine?
>
> Dunno. I generally think that tools should report
> errors when the input given them is inappropriate.
Tend to agree, the more complex we make checkpatch the more often it
will be wrong. And it is wrong enough already.
-apw