Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:1287:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d7csp3483214pxv; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 00:54:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTBVAbnl4V4TgLACZzw8jdTgzaC0IMLSDBRVBtoAECW1Av4GqDn67F8XSppEZ/R7ImCgRn X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:76f0:: with SMTP id kg16mr25628523ejc.309.1626681262637; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 00:54:22 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1626681262; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=E/zLbpt9G1/J8/GNKJQSgCxJMcJLykQwBEXXvIvI0elQ2dG7/WfK3MglzfmyMV8jQb iyVjv9eLprXG+N+e/0wFAYgQFyU4YfzV0Vy86U5JJt+jcNlA5+msGnj2nI+mYdYFNqJ9 vdHtAQ/S5vsug6o5f2/4TSCX+EGUNjpP9oJESQeAA0uxYhSeqdpHZB1znjfeyWhBkO1p Eou04qtMZXX9PD9bq8a5QVunEJQhkrWTIMqLVoUxa3nPAy7hx2lhzjJ0hgLD+3urGEW8 cUEdexhxjSeyS72DrtBV5z3J47woy5Y6GSvr8ZmCyGgBjW/b2ZTRmdSwq0XhyW1pl45P 9/bA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject :message-id; bh=XfRp5oLlCioK6F59/qSMdkk79UHMbYORZ+MrZPqaZDI=; b=uIcfw6dbwHM4FpjeYcsMt0jloxXzxWblsXoBsY43/zWBfNCXwoX3YFFscSaD+dkNHI +YT3iilmULjkl6av8Z/GY9mcuUiCF3ElHBMWpiBcAGpPQSG51XcVa3nbFUHz06WBD5WP PZ6XO1KpsZJOW8rXQGDDV+J8ubu6dncPoOOCFiKPfO1/p/xYaB0/VLoB8MyCnKPIAfMZ uxxcPYMWyOlHY3v3ZniKBW8go7Xv8uGCd2EFP0QK+nF9nXcR+1VMN+oJhp1/M+0O/4sU WXPrto+1m7GztSKPXRYlm4PQ5fKfO4/CJXEigJttfA95Z5okl6DFJFznaMJAx/4Gbf4Q vadg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j24si18784715edq.12.2021.07.19.00.54.00; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 00:54:22 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235129AbhGSHzV (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 19 Jul 2021 03:55:21 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0003.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.3]:55836 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235086AbhGSHzU (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jul 2021 03:55:20 -0400 Received: from omf10.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9BE9182CF669; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 07:52:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7A474235201; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 07:52:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4e42f2580d8b473ac7e25642b039adf73b5efe06.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] checkpatch: add a rule to check general block comment style From: Joe Perches To: Ani Sinha , Lukas Bulwahn Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , anirban.sinha@nokia.com, mikelley@microsoft.com, Andy Whitcroft , Dwaipayan Ray Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 00:52:17 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <20210714063422.2164699-1-ani@anisinha.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" User-Agent: Evolution 3.40.0-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.20 X-Stat-Signature: z3bsa5p4w1wukmhaczxk57wqwsy56yu9 X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7A474235201 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX1+zW0MKnEInLFW/aU2/8WJF+hl9TzGV3m0= X-HE-Tag: 1626681138-267745 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2021-07-19 at 12:25 +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > I do not see why we cannot add this rule to checkpatch. If the > reviewer likes the other style of commenting they can always ask for a > correction. Having checkpatch agree with Linus' preferred style of > commenting and the preferred documeted style of commenting (which seems to > be the same) does make everything uniform and agreeable. Too many novice developers take checkpatch output as dicta. It's not. It's just produces suggestions that should _always_ be taken not very seriously. Those suggestions should perhaps be considered, but good taste should always override a brainless script. _Very_ few senior developers really care that much about any particular comment style. These are the same senior developers that would be burdened with unnecessary patches to review from those novice developers that believe checkpatch should always be followed. Do not unnecessarily burden senior developers. They are generally have other priorities.