linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Only emit LONG

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: <20140626044327.GA1645@thin>
Date:	Wed, 25 Jun 2014 21:43:27 -0700
From:	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Only emit LONG_LINE for --strict

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:59:59PM -0400, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 07:24:49PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 05:05:07PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 08:46 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > > Regardless of the long-standing debate over line width, checkpatch
> > > > should not warn about it by default.
> > > 
> > > I'm not getting involved here.
> > > 
> > > I don't care much one way or another.
> > > 
> > > I did submit a patch where I ignored 80
> > > columns recently and I was told to try
> > > again by the maintainer.
> > 
> > I'm not asking you to get involved in the Great Line Length Debate;
> > that's why I didn't attempt to patch CodingStyle or similar.  However, I
> > think it makes sense for *checkpatch* to stop emitting this warning.
> > 
> > I'm hoping that Greg will chime in, as the maintainer of staging and the
> > recipient of a huge number of checkpatch-motivated patches.
> 
> I have no problem with the existing checkpatch.pl tool and it calling
> out 80 columns as a problem that needs to be fixed.  So I don't like
> this patch at all.

I'd like to stop seeing patches go by that produce heavily over-wrapped
code that becomes less readable; it's far easier to fix checkpatch than
to tell people to ignore its false positives.

How would you feel about a patch that flagged long lines with a warning
in patch mode, but not in file mode?

- Josh Triplett
--
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/