From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Aditya <yashsri421@gmail.com>, Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
dwaipayanray1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] checkpatch: fix false positives in REPEATED_WORD warning
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 08:33:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c11f284872f3b2b017d9d27d4075582c1a40eab.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c9512657-d7d0-bf04-0e40-b3463c9f5e1b@gmail.com>
On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 18:54 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> > Would you like to work on
> > further rules that can be improved with your evaluation approach?
>
> Yes, I would like work on further rules.
Some generic ideas:
How about working to reduce runtime and complexity by
making the rules extensible or separable at startup.
Maybe move each existing rules into a separate
directory as an individual file and aggregate them at
checkpatch startup.
Maybe look at the existing rules that do not have a
$fix option and add them as appropriate.
You could fix the multiline indentation where the
current warning and fix is only for a single line
value = function(arg1,
arg2,
arg3);
where checkpatch emits only single warning and fix
for the line with arg2, but not the line with arg3);
Maybe try to make the coding styles supported more
flexible:
Allow braces in different places, support different
tab indentation sizes, spacing rules around operators,
function definition layouts, etc.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Aditya <yashsri421@gmail.com>, Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Cc: dwaipayanray1@gmail.com,
linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v3] checkpatch: fix false positives in REPEATED_WORD warning
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 08:33:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c11f284872f3b2b017d9d27d4075582c1a40eab.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c9512657-d7d0-bf04-0e40-b3463c9f5e1b@gmail.com>
On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 18:54 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> > Would you like to work on
> > further rules that can be improved with your evaluation approach?
>
> Yes, I would like work on further rules.
Some generic ideas:
How about working to reduce runtime and complexity by
making the rules extensible or separable at startup.
Maybe move each existing rules into a separate
directory as an individual file and aggregate them at
checkpatch startup.
Maybe look at the existing rules that do not have a
$fix option and add them as appropriate.
You could fix the multiline indentation where the
current warning and fix is only for a single line
value = function(arg1,
arg2,
arg3);
where checkpatch emits only single warning and fix
for the line with arg2, but not the line with arg3);
Maybe try to make the coding styles supported more
flexible:
Allow braces in different places, support different
tab indentation sizes, spacing rules around operators,
function definition layouts, etc.
_______________________________________________
Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list
Linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-kernel-mentees
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-24 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-23 13:38 [PATCH v3] checkpatch: fix false positives in REPEATED_WORD warning Aditya Srivastava
2020-10-23 13:38 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Aditya Srivastava
2020-10-23 19:06 ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-10-23 19:06 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Lukas Bulwahn
2020-10-23 20:19 ` Joe Perches
2020-10-23 20:19 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Joe Perches
2020-10-24 13:24 ` Aditya
2020-10-24 13:24 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Aditya
2020-10-24 15:33 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2020-10-24 15:33 ` Joe Perches
2020-10-24 18:12 ` Aditya
2020-10-24 18:12 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Aditya
2020-10-25 5:51 ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-10-25 5:51 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Lukas Bulwahn
2020-10-25 6:06 ` Joe Perches
2020-10-25 6:06 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Joe Perches
2020-10-25 6:11 ` Lukas Bulwahn
2020-10-25 6:11 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Lukas Bulwahn
2020-10-25 10:01 ` Aditya
2020-10-25 10:01 ` [Linux-kernel-mentees] " Aditya
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5c11f284872f3b2b017d9d27d4075582c1a40eab.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=dwaipayanray1@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com \
--cc=yashsri421@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.