Received: by 10.223.164.221 with SMTP id h29csp160800wrb; Fri, 3 Nov 2017 12:09:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+Sl7icuqQggeXUUXsf8NOK/kP20Uq7hD2mnL3QC6UKfydpN7zPKVW/6LG9LrGh0fikzGSeZ X-Received: by 10.98.237.5 with SMTP id u5mr8603831pfh.209.1509736153044; Fri, 03 Nov 2017 12:09:13 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1509736152; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Ropi+BihmVcxbmpzzkjxKjU+Ab/o2pNKldeJa2JpGqA0X1xBBkmOqPi8Y2V/F46k8d ebnNATxFpKniVdUx921hE3dfFcP1nxicBaiaZzzb5gD4uhAUQFtXR/hK9wBKiJujzSA7 ZBGVhzlHMe8fICoEUo33tweJsj/2xgTm3YQGO5bYhNndebpK5rrBt7VaVliczY1+yb4A YHI0Hc2jOreijBBbq9oEr/ShDR5rpEZ43bSHmenx1CiK/DuD0ysOMfcWnvYpdmiCEnnh LnRon/AOOHwgk5uHC6imOiMp9g4gC86MtOe03GZfncDG5rhoqaBFp1icusWBvEMjjN2U 9dFQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from :dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=ZEV7CmAVdfX9xNnjFCtUvexJlUwDR1Ovs2VcbEZhY58=; b=iuFxL30TmKw+vBc6BnyjMMGoCWtj/DhrGfDSs0lZWd1tq8mKMtqecF0+aQrfaEJKvP 4EynBICcoIyXjOJFdWnnVITk5QZRpTaZU+52wmpopgGLgV4DXab48TkaYZUd0AvdXYPe Ut2WMXEK5rzfrZLU/GUyTzEh2E0y7sw66YwMYCBWyhaVYJi+53SjA9pqEh3iJ4EtDCFY 727lOL+uagatU9KlnVsAgVPTW3LAQFd8gdL84/SYELJ+5xnVWmbqLUCiALgG7y5Wo01z T0zeKcpyJtygCaTdJlfX7aCJj6HQA4r3hXwCkcCzqVlSleOOyIz+DOKJdaYkIUPQYDXN ZODA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@alibaba-inc.com header.s=default header.b=w52uc17l; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=alibaba-inc.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w5si6371564pgo.221.2017.11.03.12.08.59; Fri, 03 Nov 2017 12:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@alibaba-inc.com header.s=default header.b=w52uc17l; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=alibaba-inc.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932461AbdKCTIU (ORCPT + 92 others); Fri, 3 Nov 2017 15:08:20 -0400 Received: from out0-211.mail.aliyun.com ([140.205.0.211]:44066 "EHLO out0-211.mail.aliyun.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751415AbdKCTIT (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Nov 2017 15:08:19 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alibaba-inc.com; s=default; t=1509736095; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-Id; bh=ZEV7CmAVdfX9xNnjFCtUvexJlUwDR1Ovs2VcbEZhY58=; b=w52uc17l1EqeuUUenIbhxH8lR5W2cD9ea1xx2tIT35Wm2jrl+9zhPvpz0JA9GuaY3qAtFJMuZM1jVjVPYb0tfpg89ZcdLOWjfoonozkIa8GTfnxfsiogd+IWeXE4Eklw/WGeDhwZvAzRv4iEajRJGgjzeIJGPMOlX5oTdRlCq6Y= X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R681e4;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e02c03310;MF=yang.s@alibaba-inc.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=5;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---.9JVLo-C_1509736086; Received: from e19h19392.et15sqa.tbsite.net(mailfrom:yang.s@alibaba-inc.com ip:106.11.238.197) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Sat, 04 Nov 2017 03:08:11 +0800 From: "Yang Shi" To: apw@canonical.com, joe@perches.com Cc: , "Yang Shi" , Subject: [RFC PATCH] scripts: checkpatch.pl: remove obsolete in_atomic rule Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2017 03:08:06 +0800 Message-Id: <1509736086-408-1-git-send-email-yang.s@alibaba-inc.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.3.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org checkpatch.pl still reports the below in_atomic warning: WARNING: use of in_atomic() is incorrect outside core kernel code + if (in_atomic()) But, in_atomic() has been used outside kernel dir for a long time, and even drivers. So, remove the obsolete rule even though they can be ignored. Signed-off-by: Yang Shi CC: Andrew Morton --- Not sure if removing the obsolete rule is preferred by checkpatch.pl, anyway it sounds not make sense to keep invalid rule. scripts/checkpatch.pl | 11 ----------- 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index 8b80bac..e8cf94f 100755 --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl @@ -6231,17 +6231,6 @@ sub process { "Using $1 should generally have parentheses around the comparison\n" . $herecurr); } -# whine mightly about in_atomic - if ($line =~ /\bin_atomic\s*\(/) { - if ($realfile =~ m@^drivers/@) { - ERROR("IN_ATOMIC", - "do not use in_atomic in drivers\n" . $herecurr); - } elsif ($realfile !~ m@^kernel/@) { - WARN("IN_ATOMIC", - "use of in_atomic() is incorrect outside core kernel code\n" . $herecurr); - } - } - # whine about ACCESS_ONCE if ($^V && $^V ge 5.10.0 && $line =~ /\bACCESS_ONCE\s*$balanced_parens\s*(=(?!=))?\s*($FuncArg)?/) { -- 1.8.3.1 From 1583329809924359311@xxx Mon Nov 06 15:09:34 +0000 2017 X-GM-THRID: 1583329809924359311 X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread