From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scripts: add checkpatch wrapper
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 10:33:56 +0000
Message-ID: <20151102103355.GA5688@bricha3-MOBL3>
References: <1445615606-3885-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
 <2182686.Rj6sEZi19Z@xps13> <20151030161640.GA5284@bricha3-MOBL3>
 <2771291.DI3Lyk6PGI@xps13>
 <E923DB57A917B54B9182A2E928D00FA61282A54A@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Van Haaren, Harry" <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3CD8E81
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  2 Nov 2015 11:34:05 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <E923DB57A917B54B9182A2E928D00FA61282A54A@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 10:28:35AM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wrote:
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] scripts: add checkpatch wrapper
> > 
> > 2015-10-30 16:16, Bruce Richardson:
> > > Another request, can you perhaps also fix the script for situations where
> > > checkpatch.pl is not in the kernel tree.
> > > <snip>
> 
> > OK
> > I prefer using it in the Linux tree because it is updated with "git pull".
> 
> I would like to suggest including the checkpatch.pl script itself in the dpdk tree, as this would ensure that we are all running the exact same version of checkpatch.
> 
> My previous patchset had errors that I had not detected because I ran an older checkpatch.pl, and I think there are others who have similar issues that the checkpatch version provides more/less errors.
> 
> If included in the repo, we would all automatically upgrade when the next checkpatch.pl is merged - providing consistency.
> 
> -Harry

+1 

/Bruce