Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756187Ab0BJR7Q (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:59:16 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f228.google.com ([209.85.219.228]:39608 "EHLO mail-ew0-f228.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756071Ab0BJR7N convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:59:13 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=uti8PLuLh2HCJQDM1/Vt/C83hCGNDCVIJZpdtzySk/VZXcQo1FdtaMhsyeEVRxYPDg /sUR9VUFtdI7gPAou4akc6eW0F1XKwTDnRIqNB14hnCR+SUh8LzTjTgzvhr6OIukWHup rcW823cuh8+MI2UDFXDU9xCI9lvxr6nn+/gXE= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100210084908.ad315b9b.rdunlap@xenotime.net> References: <1265762465-21114-1-git-send-email-richih.mailinglist@gmail.com> <20100210084908.ad315b9b.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:59:11 +0100 Message-ID: <2d460de71002100959j49c25e37n11a8870454251d84@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] SCRIPTS: s/should/must/ for all ERRORs From: Richard Hartmann To: Randy Dunlap Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft , Andrew Morton , Daniel Walker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1487 Lines: 37 On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 17:49, Randy Dunlap wrote: > Well, I will gladly disagree.  checkpatch is an advisory tool. > It has no such final authority to enforce /must/. > > /must/ would OK on syntax errors that must be fixed before they will compile. fwiw, Joe Perches raised the same point in private conversation so there are two votes against this patch. I submitted it knowing that it might be controversial, but I went with the rest of the wording in checkpatch. Other errors have similar wording, for example prohibited, but that does not mean I am hell-bent on arguing this point. Personally, I feel that warnings are suggestions and errors are hard limits, but it is, of course, OK to disagree with this stance. This is part of the reason why I submitted it as three separate patches instead of a single one. This decision is not mine to make in any case. Dropping it is totally fine by me. Thanks for your feedback, Richard PS: As I am new to the whole concept of touching the large scary kernel let me use this opportunity to ask if I should expect answers on the other patch emails or if they are just merged zsh-style: Silently and you will notice what went through when you pull a few days later. -- 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/