[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BAYC1-PASMTP03BE3FCD597E8017F583D1AEB20@CEZ.ICE>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:15:23 -0400
From: Sean <seanlkml@...patico.ca>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
roel <12o3l@...cali.nl>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spin_lock_unlocked cleanups
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:06:09 +0200
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > The problem with git-commit is who's repo to add the hook to. I did
> > attempt to do this by picking up each of linus' main releases and then
> > using the git blame engine to attribute each "failure" to a particular
> > commit. The plan then would be to send a nasty-gram to the committer
> > about violations there-in.
Wouldn't it be easier to pass each commit through checkpatch and
email the committer if there is a problem? Each commit can be viewed
as a standalone patch afterall; what does blame add?
> The question is, whether we can convince the git developers to integrate
> it. When a commit happens and checkpatch.pl is in scripts/, then run the
> patch through it before doing the actual commit.
Definitely the way to go. I'm pretty sure the Git guys would agree to
distribute checkpatch.pl along with the existing pre-commit hook. So
at least enabling checkpatch would be trivial for those convinced to
use it.
Sean
-
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