[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53c071a4fc34b1bf5a655cc468837b4fbe6f6787.camel@perches.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 17:59:15 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>,
Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: Anyone have ideas for checkpatch improvements ?
One of the linux-mentees, Dwaipayan Ray, asked me in a private
email for ideas for improvements to checkpatch.
Though I am not his nominal mentor, my response to him was the below.
Does anyone have any more ideas for checkpatch improvements or
enhancements?
---
On Fri, 2021-01-15 at 21:02 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> I am actually writing to you
> regarding any possible ideas for checkpatch or any improvements
> you would like to see moving forward with checkpatch.
>
> The last time you had suggested about --fix options. But as we saw
> that maybe some places are better off with it. So do you have
> anything particular in mind?
>
> Again, thanks a lot in advance. Since my mentorship will go on till
> about march, I am indeed in dire need of ideas.
You could:
o Separate the various tests into individual modules that are aggregated
at startup.
o Create a test suite.
o Externally document the thing with use cases, all the named tests
are not particularly documented.
o Add --verbose test descriptions, so 'why this message is emitted'
description is optionally available to / understood by the user.
o Add support for various brace location / required spacing styles.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists