[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fad58e4f48237894de0d511adf1d663a42a2eee7.camel@perches.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 10:18:44 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
shuah <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v6] lib/list-test: add a test for
the 'list' doubly linked list
On Wed, 2019-10-30 at 09:35 -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> Agreed. I can see the point of not wanting to write an exception into
> checkpatch for every exception of it's general rules; however, it
> would be nice if there was a way to maybe have a special comment or
> something that could turn off a checkpatch error. That way, a
> checkpatch error/warning always means some action should be taken, and
> if a rule is being ignored, there is always documentation as to why.
That couldn't work when a comment which may exist
in a file is out of scope of the patch context.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists