Date:	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 01:16:05 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Allan, Bruce W" <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
	Anish Kumar <anish198519851985@...il.com>,
	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: do not test/warn of leading whitespace
 before signature tags

On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 01:07 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 00:59 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 00:47 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 00:26 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 23:48 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > > > > From: Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Commit 2011247 introduced additional style checks for signature tags in
> > > > > patches which is good.  Unfortunately, now whenever patches are checked
> > > > > by piping the output of 'git show' or 'stg show' through checkpatch it
> > > > > warns not to use whitespace before all signature tags since these (and the
> > > > > rest of the patch description) are indented.  Remove this test/warning.
> > > > 
> > > > I think this is not a good idea.
> > > > 
> > > > checkpatch is meant for patches not git log output.
> > > > indenting signatures can cause other problems later.
> > > > 
> > > > I think you can avoid this easily by using checkpatch
> > > > option --ignore=BAD_SIGN_OFF when using git log output
> > > > as input.
> > > 
> > > The problem I have with this is that the sign-off's are not bad, they
> > > are by default indented by 'git show' or 'stg show' so checkpatch.pl
> > > should handle the "default" formatting of git/stg and if there is
> > > additional indenting not expected, then the sign-off's should be
> > > considered bad.
> > 
> > I disagree.
> > 
> > checkpatch should handle the default input of patches
> > as best it can.
> > 
> > I suppose checkpatch could have a different "--input=git"
> > or some such to avoid certain things that git might produce
> > that a patch would not.
> 
> That does sound an alternative which would be acceptable.
> 
> > 
> > Deleting useful checks for patches isn't a good idea.
> > 
> > > If this option is added, then if there were "real"
> > > problems with the sign-off, it would not be displayed.
> > 
> > So what?
> > 
> > It would also be too late to do anything about
> > it anyway as it would already be committed.
> 
> If you are running it on patches already committed to maintainers tree,
> but if you are running checkpatch.pl on a patch on your local tree
> before you send it out, you can correct any changes necessary. 
> 
> > 
> > > > You could also use: 
> > > > git log --format="commit %H%nAuthor: %an <%ae>%nDate:   %aD%n%n%s%n%n%b"
> > > > so that you get the current default --format=medium
> > > > output without indenting the commit log body.
> > > Even doing this does not resolve the "false" warnings" that
> > > checkpatch.pl produces regarding the sign-off's.
> > 
> > I tried it.  It works for me.
> > What about it doesn't work for you?
> > 
> 
> I did the following using David Miller's net-next tree...
> 
> git log -1 > ../test.patch
> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl ../test.patch
> 
> and I get the following:
> WARNING: Do not use whitespace before Signed-off-by:
> #9: 
>     Signed-off-by: Robin Holt <holt@....com>

Dull.

You didn't do what I suggested, and you aren't
checking the actual patch for the commit.

Try:

$ git log --format="commit %H%nAuthor: %an <%ae>%nDate:   %aD%n%n%s%n%n%b" \
	-p -1 master | ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 826 lines checked

Your patch has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.

(btw: checkpatch accepts input from standard input if you use a trailing "-")


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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists