[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1513447353.4647.39.camel@perches.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 10:02:33 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
Knut Omang <knut.omang@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
rds-devel@....oracle.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
John Haxby <john.haxby@...cle.com>,
Åsmund Østvold <asmund.ostvold@...cle.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
"Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Support for generalized use of make C={1,2} via
a wrapper program
On Sat, 2017-12-16 at 09:47 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Dec 2017 15:42:25 +0100
> Knut Omang <knut.omang@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> > This patch series implements features to make it easier to run checkers on the
> > entire kernel as part of automatic and developer testing.
> >
> > This is done by replacing the sparse specific setup for the C={1,2} variable
> > in the makefiles with setup for running scripts/runchecks, a new program that
> > can run any number of different "checkers". The behaviour of runchecks is
> > defined by simple "global" configuration in scripts/runchecks.cfg which can be
> > extended by local configuration applying to individual files, directories or
> > subtrees in the source.
[]
> I like the ability to add more checkers and keep then in the main
> upstream tree. But adding overrides for specific subsystems goes against
> the policy that all subsystems should be treated equally.
>
> There was discussion at Kernel Summit about how the different
> subsystems already have different rules. This appears to be a
> way to make that worse.
I think that's OK and somewhat reasonable.
What is perhaps unreasonable is requiring subsystems with
a local specific style to change to some universal style.
see comments like:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/11/689
Powered by blists - more mailing lists