Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 18:21:24 +0100
From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Checkpatch: False positive
Message-ID: <20150716172124.GK3681@bark>
References: <20150716105554.GA14080@linux>
 <1437060958.16262.28.camel@perches.com>
 <20150716154341.GJ3681@bark>
 <1437062336.2495.6.camel@perches.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1437062336.2495.6.camel@perches.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1278
Lines: 36

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:58:56AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 16:43 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:35:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > #31: 
> > > >  arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c         | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> > 
> > I guess those are in the limbo land between the end of message and
> > beginning of the patch itself.  Perhaps the test should at least stop at
> > the end of header marker, at the '---'.
> > 
> > -apw
> 
> Maybe, but the test already stops at signatures like
> Signed-off-by: that should always be above the ---.
> 
> This might help, but there are _many_ false positives.
> 
> The other thing that might help is for people to take
> the warnings the script produces less seriously.
> 
> Maybe convert:
> 
> ERROR -> defect
> WARNING -> unstylish
> CHECK -> nitpick

Heh, that has long been the main issue, please please believe your brain
not checkpatch.  But yes some less inflamitory words might, just might,
reduce the noise.

-apw
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/