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: <2899994.xJFnvJAAA5@pcbe13614>
Date:   Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:03:47 +0100
From:   Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...n.ch>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:     Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: report: scripts: checkpatch: Spell Checker Does Not Run with '-f'

On Thursday, February 14, 2019 3:44:55 PM CET Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-02-14 at 13:48 +0100, Federico Vaga wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Recently I have produce a couple of patches but I get different warnings
> > if I run checkpatch on the file (-f) or if I run it of a patch file. In
> > particular, the problem I found is with the spell checker which seems to
> > run only when the option '-f' is not used. I am wandering if there are
> > other similar cases.
> > 
> > I do not know Perl, so I cannot investigate more, but I have a practical
> > example. I have this simple patch applied on my tree that introduces a
> > spell
> > error:
> If you want spelling fixes on files you have to use --strict

Thanks

Is it a design choice to have different checks enabled with '-f'? 
 
> > From: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...n.ch>
> > Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 13:29:39 +0100
> > Subject: [PATCH] script: checkpatch: buggy(?) output with -f option
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...n.ch>
> > ---
> > 
> >  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c
> > b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c index b32d67c..f4deb90 100644
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c
> > @@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ static int ocores_poll_wait(struct ocores_i2c *i2c)
> > 
> >  		/* on going transfer */
> >  		mask = OCI2C_STAT_TIP;
> >  		/*
> > 
> > -		 * We wait for the data to be transferred (8bit),
> > +		 * We wait for the data to be transfered (8bit),
> > 
> >  		 * then we start polling on the ACK/NACK bit
> >  		 */
> >  		
> >  		udelay((8 * 1000) / i2c->bus_clock_khz);




Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ