Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] checkpatch: fix false positives in REPEATED_WORD
 warning
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
        lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com, dwaipayanray1@gmail.com
References: <20201024000830.12871-1-yashsri421@gmail.com>
 <5bc34c6faf989f528c92f5e631607f1774f08d20.camel@perches.com>
From:   Aditya <yashsri421@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c4432b0c-3e21-20ec-d439-cdfebc283148@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 24 Oct 2020 14:58:17 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5bc34c6faf989f528c92f5e631607f1774f08d20.camel@perches.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 24/10/20 7:07 am, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 05:38 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote: 
>> A quick evaluation on v5.6..v5.8 showed that this fix reduces
>> REPEATED_WORD warnings from 2797 to 907.
> 
> How many of these 907 remaining are still false positive?
>  
>> A quick manual check found all cases are related to hex output or
>> list command outputs in commit messages.
> 
> You mean 1890 of the 2797 are now no longer reported and all 1890
> were false positives yes?
> 

Yes. In v5.6..5.8, there were 2797 warnings for REPEATED_WORD, after
these changes, they are reduced to 907.
However, many among these 907 must have been fixed by Dwaipayan's
patch. I'll replace it with 1890 instead, for the better.

>>  			pos($rawline) = 1 if (!$in_commit_log);
>>  			while ($rawline =~ /\b($word_pattern) (?=($word_pattern))/g) {
>>  
>>
>> @@ -3074,6 +3076,17 @@ sub process {
>>  				next if ($start_char =~ /^\S$/);
>>  				next if (index(" \t.,;?!", $end_char) == -1);
>>  
>>
>> +                                # avoid repeating hex occurrences like 'ff ff fe 09 ...'
>> +                                my %allow_repeated_words = (
>> +                                        add => '',
>> +                                        added => '',
>> +                                        bad => '',
>> +                                        be => '',
>> +                                );
> 
> If perl caches this local hash declaration, fine,
> but I think it better to use 'our %allow_repeated_words'
> and move it so it's only declared using the file scope.
> 

I ran checkpatch over few commits, it was working fine. But I'll move
it to file scope, using 'our'. That should do as well.

>> +                                if ($first =~ /\b[0-9a-f]{2,}\b/) {
> 
> This regex matches only lower case so it wouldn't match "Add".
> 
> I think this regex would be clearer using
> 	/^[0-9a-f]+$/i or /^[A-Fa-f0-9]+$/
> 
> 

Missed it. Will do.

Thanks
Aditya