[U-Boot] Policy for checkpatch usage?

[Detlev Zundel]

Hi Graeme,

> On Wednesday, April 20, 2011, Graeme Russ <graeme.russ at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 20, 2011, Detlev Zundel <dzu at denx.de> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> As a base for discussion, what about this:
>>>
>>>   Use common sense in interpreting the results of checkpatch. Warnings
>>>   that clearly only make sense in the Linux kernel can be ignored.  Also
>>>   warnings produced for _context lines_ rather than actual changes can
>>>   also be ignored.
>>
>> One man's common sense is another's idiocy
>>
>> I vote for a zero warnings, zero errors U-Boot specific checkpatch
>>
>
> I also think that all patches should be submitted with a checkpatch
> summary with an explaination for any errors or warnings - this will at
> least save a little effort for the maintainers and reduce the number of
> patches bounced only to have the checkpatch problems argued away
> by the author anyway

When we accept 0 errors and 0 warnings only, then we will always see the
same text :)

As long as we are not there, I do agree but then we should come up with
a recipe on how to automate this.  I looked into git format-patch but it
does not seem to have such an option.  Does anyone have a clever
one-liner for this?

Cheers
  Detlev

-- 
Math and Alcohol don't mix, so...
PLEASE DON'T DRINK AND DERIVE

[Motto of the society: Mathematicians Against Drunk Deriving]
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich,  Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: dzu at denx.de