linux-kernel - Re: Make checkpatch.pl's quiet option not print the summary on no errors

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080115201054.GC21511@shadowen.org>
Date:	Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:10:54 +0000
From:	Andy Whitcroft <andyw@...ibm.com>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: Make checkpatch.pl's quiet option not print the summary on no errors

On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 01:54:42AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> Subject: Make checkpatch.pl's quiet option not print the summary on no 
> errors
> From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
> CC: apw@...ibm.com
> 
> Right now, in quiet mode, checkpatch.pl still prints a summary line even
> if the patch is 100% clean. IMO, "quiet mode" should mean "no output if 
> clean",
> the patch below makes that so. (This also makes the quilt integration
> on my system work nicer :)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>

While looking to integrate this I discovered that the current default
was a desired feature requested by Ingo.  So I guess we need to come up
with a combination of options which give us both.

Currently we have --[no-]summary meaning suppress/add a summary, and
--quiet meaning suppress output but which does not suppress the summary.

We have a few options:

1) allow doubling of -q to make the summary subject to -q,
2) allow doubling of --summary to mean "override -q", --summary becoming
   subject to -q,
3) add a new option --force-summary which always produces a summary,
   --summary becoming subject to -q, and
4) add a new option --summary-on-fail which is subject to -q.

I feel the last of these is the most obvious option, and carries
no modification to current semantics.

Thoughts?

-apw
--
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/