linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: checkpatch: add description if no filenames are given

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKXUXMwtMBCB6ovrG90BB5EruTkFSk=O8X-kxeikqhDgt8hryQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 May 2021 11:09:44 +0200
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To:     Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
Cc:     Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: checkpatch: add description if no
 filenames are given

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:12 AM Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn> wrote:
>
> After commit 45107ff6d526 ("checkpatch: if no filenames then read stdin"),
> if no filenames are given, it will read patch from stdin rather than exit
> directly, it is a bit confusing whether the script hangs, I do not quite
> know what to do next until I understood the code logic.
>
> It is unnecessary to print some info if no filenames are given, because it
> is like trying to make cat without command line arguments emit something,
> just add description for somebody that actually reads the available kernel
> documentation on checkpatch.
>

How about:
...
if no filenames are given, it will read patch from stdin rather than exit
directly. This means the script waits for input indefinitely, which
confuses new checkpatch users at first.

Add some basic documentation on this behaviour of checkpatch to lower
the confusion.
...

No need to mention that you were confused.

Other than that, it now looks good. Thanks for the patch, can we get a
quick v3 and then we are settled.

Lukas

> Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
> ---
>  Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
> index 51fed1b..3eb9ead 100644
> --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
> @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ Usage::
>
>    ./scripts/checkpatch.pl [OPTION]... [FILE]...
>
> +When FILE is -, or absent, checkpatch reads from standard input.
> +
>  Available options:
>
>   - -q,  --quiet
> --
> 2.1.0
>