linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
@ 2011-03-22 23:13 Sarah Sharp
  2011-03-22 23:22 ` Sarah Sharp
  2011-03-23 10:07 ` Johannes Weiner
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sarah Sharp @ 2011-03-22 23:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andy Whitcroft; +Cc: linux-kernel, James Bottomley

There are a lot of warnings in checkpatch.pl that are rather subjective.
For instance, when a line is 81 characters long, and the patch submitter
is just cleaning up existing code, a maintainer may not care that
checkpatch.pl warns about the over 80-character line.  It should be up to
the maintainer what warnings they want to pay attention to.

Unfortunately, if you try to run checkpatch.pl as part of a git pre-commit
hook and a patch in a series being applied by git-am fails checkpatch.pl,
the whole process stops.  At that point I usually end up just disabling
that git hook, which means I don't see real errors in the patches.

Add an option to checkpatch.pl to print the warnings, but not return an
error code when the --lazy flag is present.  (Anyone with a better name
can pipe up, lazy just seemed to be the opposite to strict.)  This allows
the maintainer to view the warnings, but still allow the patch application
process to continue.

Signed-off-by: Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com>
---
 scripts/checkpatch.pl |    6 ++++++
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 4c0383d..4519b5b 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ my $V = '0.31';
 use Getopt::Long qw(:config no_auto_abbrev);
 
 my $quiet = 0;
+my $lazy = 0;
 my $tree = 1;
 my $chk_signoff = 1;
 my $chk_patch = 1;
@@ -46,6 +47,7 @@ Options:
   --terse                    one line per report
   -f, --file                 treat FILE as regular source file
   --subjective, --strict     enable more subjective tests
+  --lazy                     print warnings, but don't return an error condition
   --root=PATH                PATH to the kernel tree root
   --no-summary               suppress the per-file summary
   --mailback                 only produce a report in case of warnings/errors
@@ -80,6 +82,7 @@ GetOptions(
 
 	'debug=s'	=> \%debug,
 	'test-only=s'	=> \$tst_only,
+	'lazy+'		=> \$lazy,
 	'h|help'	=> \$help,
 	'version'	=> \$help
 ) or help(1);
@@ -1096,6 +1099,9 @@ sub report {
 
 	push(our @report, $line);
 
+	if ($lazy == 1) {
+		return 0;
+	}
 	return 1;
 }
 sub report_dump {
-- 
1.7.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
  2011-03-22 23:13 [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value Sarah Sharp
@ 2011-03-22 23:22 ` Sarah Sharp
  2011-03-22 23:40   ` [RFC v2] Checkpatch: " Sarah Sharp
  2011-03-23  1:41   ` [RFC] checkpatch: " Steven Rostedt
  2011-03-23 10:07 ` Johannes Weiner
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sarah Sharp @ 2011-03-22 23:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andy Whitcroft; +Cc: linux-kernel, James Bottomley

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:13:10PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> There are a lot of warnings in checkpatch.pl that are rather subjective.
> For instance, when a line is 81 characters long, and the patch submitter
> is just cleaning up existing code, a maintainer may not care that
> checkpatch.pl warns about the over 80-character line.  It should be up to
> the maintainer what warnings they want to pay attention to.
> 
> Unfortunately, if you try to run checkpatch.pl as part of a git pre-commit
> hook and a patch in a series being applied by git-am fails checkpatch.pl,
> the whole process stops.  At that point I usually end up just disabling
> that git hook, which means I don't see real errors in the patches.
> 
> Add an option to checkpatch.pl to print the warnings, but not return an
> error code when the --lazy flag is present.  (Anyone with a better name
> can pipe up, lazy just seemed to be the opposite to strict.)  This allows
> the maintainer to view the warnings, but still allow the patch application
> process to continue.

BTW, I'm not a perl hacker, and I don't really understand the reporting code,
so someone who knows it (Andy?) should make the correct patch.  I didn't notice
before sending, but right now the warning count reporting is bogus, although
the warnings don't make the script return an error code:

sarah@xanatos:~/git/kernels/xhci$ git am ~/Maildir.fetchmail/.to-apply/
Applying: USB: xhci - fix unsafe macro definitions
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 21 lines checked

Your patch has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
Applying: USB: xhci: unsigned char never equals -1
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 55 lines checked

Your patch has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
Applying: USB: xhci: simplify logic of skipping missed isoc TDs
WARNING: line over 80 characters
#12: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-ring.c:1669:
+	struct xhci_ring *ep_ring = xhci_dma_to_transfer_ring(ep, event->buffer);

WARNING: line over 80 characters
#136: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-ring.c:1743:
+	struct xhci_ring *ep_ring = xhci_dma_to_transfer_ring(ep, event->buffer);

WARNING: line over 80 characters
#164: FILE: drivers/usb/host/xhci-ring.c:1770:
+	struct xhci_ring *ep_ring = xhci_dma_to_transfer_ring(ep, event->buffer);

total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 231 lines checked

Your patch has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
Applying: USB: fix formatting of SuperSpeed endpoints in /proc/bus/usb/devices
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 28 lines checked

Your patch has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.


Note that second-to-last patch should have said 3 warnings.  So my patch needs
to be changed, but I really do want this functionality.

Sarah Sharp


> Signed-off-by: Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  scripts/checkpatch.pl |    6 ++++++
>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 4c0383d..4519b5b 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ my $V = '0.31';
>  use Getopt::Long qw(:config no_auto_abbrev);
>  
>  my $quiet = 0;
> +my $lazy = 0;
>  my $tree = 1;
>  my $chk_signoff = 1;
>  my $chk_patch = 1;
> @@ -46,6 +47,7 @@ Options:
>    --terse                    one line per report
>    -f, --file                 treat FILE as regular source file
>    --subjective, --strict     enable more subjective tests
> +  --lazy                     print warnings, but don't return an error condition
>    --root=PATH                PATH to the kernel tree root
>    --no-summary               suppress the per-file summary
>    --mailback                 only produce a report in case of warnings/errors
> @@ -80,6 +82,7 @@ GetOptions(
>  
>  	'debug=s'	=> \%debug,
>  	'test-only=s'	=> \$tst_only,
> +	'lazy+'		=> \$lazy,
>  	'h|help'	=> \$help,
>  	'version'	=> \$help
>  ) or help(1);
> @@ -1096,6 +1099,9 @@ sub report {
>  
>  	push(our @report, $line);
>  
> +	if ($lazy == 1) {
> +		return 0;
> +	}
>  	return 1;
>  }
>  sub report_dump {
> -- 
> 1.7.1
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [RFC v2] Checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
  2011-03-22 23:22 ` Sarah Sharp
@ 2011-03-22 23:40   ` Sarah Sharp
  2011-03-23  1:41   ` [RFC] checkpatch: " Steven Rostedt
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sarah Sharp @ 2011-03-22 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andy Whitcroft; +Cc: linux-kernel, James Bottomley

There are a lot of warnings in checkpatch.pl that are rather subjective.
For instance, when a line is 81 characters long, and the patch submitter
is just cleaning up existing code, a maintainer may not care that
checkpatch.pl warns about the over 80-character line.  It should be up to
the maintainer what warnings they want to pay attention to.

Unfortunately, if you try to run checkpatch.pl as part of a git pre-commit
hook and a patch in a series being applied by git-am fails checkpatch.pl,
the whole process stops.  At that point I usually end up just disabling
that git hook, which means I don't see real errors in the patches.

Add an option to checkpatch.pl to print the warnings, but not return an
error code when the --lazy flag is present.  (Anyone with a better name
can pipe up, lazy just seemed to be the opposite to strict.)  This allows
the maintainer to view the warnings, but still allow the patch application
process to continue.

Signed-off-by: Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com>
---

Ok, I think this version works correctly.  My git hook returns an error
when the code to be submitted causes a checkpatch error, and doesn't
return an error code (but still prints the warnings) when the code to be
committed triggers checkpatch warnings, when --lazy is used.  This
version also changes the summary message to be unhappy when warnings are
found.

 scripts/checkpatch.pl |   11 ++++++++---
 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 4c0383d..ad2d423 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ my $V = '0.31';
 use Getopt::Long qw(:config no_auto_abbrev);
 
 my $quiet = 0;
+my $lazy = 0;
 my $tree = 1;
 my $chk_signoff = 1;
 my $chk_patch = 1;
@@ -46,6 +47,7 @@ Options:
   --terse                    one line per report
   -f, --file                 treat FILE as regular source file
   --subjective, --strict     enable more subjective tests
+  --lazy                     print warnings, but don't return an error condition
   --root=PATH                PATH to the kernel tree root
   --no-summary               suppress the per-file summary
   --mailback                 only produce a report in case of warnings/errors
@@ -80,6 +82,7 @@ GetOptions(
 
 	'debug=s'	=> \%debug,
 	'test-only=s'	=> \$tst_only,
+	'lazy+'		=> \$lazy,
 	'h|help'	=> \$help,
 	'version'	=> \$help
 ) or help(1);
@@ -1109,7 +1112,9 @@ sub ERROR {
 }
 sub WARN {
 	if (report("WARNING: $_[0]\n")) {
-		our $clean = 0;
+		if ($lazy == 0) {
+			our $clean = 0;
+		}
 		our $cnt_warn++;
 	}
 }
@@ -2952,10 +2957,10 @@ sub process {
 		}
 	}
 
-	if ($clean == 1 && $quiet == 0) {
+	if ($clean == 1 && $quiet == 0 && ($lazy == 0 || $cnt_warn == 0)) {
 		print "$vname has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.\n"
 	}
-	if ($clean == 0 && $quiet == 0) {
+	if (($clean == 0 && $quiet == 0) || ($lazy == 1 && $cnt_warn != 0)) {
 		print "$vname has style problems, please review.  If any of these errors\n";
 		print "are false positives report them to the maintainer, see\n";
 		print "CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.\n";
-- 
1.7.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
  2011-03-22 23:22 ` Sarah Sharp
  2011-03-22 23:40   ` [RFC v2] Checkpatch: " Sarah Sharp
@ 2011-03-23  1:41   ` Steven Rostedt
  2011-03-24 15:40     ` Sarah Sharp
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Steven Rostedt @ 2011-03-23  1:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sarah Sharp; +Cc: Andy Whitcroft, linux-kernel, James Bottomley

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:22:46PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> 
> BTW, I'm not a perl hacker, and I don't really understand the reporting code,
> so someone who knows it (Andy?) should make the correct patch.  I didn't notice
> before sending, but right now the warning count reporting is bogus, although
> the warnings don't make the script return an error code:
> 

> 
> 
> Note that second-to-last patch should have said 3 warnings.  So my patch needs
> to be changed, but I really do want this functionality.
> 

> > @@ -1096,6 +1099,9 @@ sub report {
> >  
> >  	push(our @report, $line);
> >  
> > +	if ($lazy == 1) {
> > +		return 0;
> > +	}
> >  	return 1;
> >  }
> >  sub report_dump {

Instead of this hunk, have:


diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 58848e3..54ec3d9 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ for my $filename (@ARGV) {
 	}
 	close($FILE);
 	if (!process($filename)) {
-		$exit = 1;
+		$exit = 1 if (!$lazy);
 	}
 	@rawlines = ();
 	@lines = ();


-- Steve


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
  2011-03-22 23:13 [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value Sarah Sharp
  2011-03-22 23:22 ` Sarah Sharp
@ 2011-03-23 10:07 ` Johannes Weiner
  2011-03-23 18:43   ` Sarah Sharp
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Weiner @ 2011-03-23 10:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sarah Sharp; +Cc: Andy Whitcroft, linux-kernel, James Bottomley

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:13:10PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> There are a lot of warnings in checkpatch.pl that are rather subjective.
> For instance, when a line is 81 characters long, and the patch submitter
> is just cleaning up existing code, a maintainer may not care that
> checkpatch.pl warns about the over 80-character line.  It should be up to
> the maintainer what warnings they want to pay attention to.
> 
> Unfortunately, if you try to run checkpatch.pl as part of a git pre-commit
> hook and a patch in a series being applied by git-am fails checkpatch.pl,
> the whole process stops.  At that point I usually end up just disabling
> that git hook, which means I don't see real errors in the patches.
> 
> Add an option to checkpatch.pl to print the warnings, but not return an
> error code when the --lazy flag is present.  (Anyone with a better name
> can pipe up, lazy just seemed to be the opposite to strict.)  This allows
> the maintainer to view the warnings, but still allow the patch application
> process to continue.

I first thought you would add code that allowed turning only select
errors into warnings.

If you just want to have git continue in any case, why not append
'|| true' to the line that invokes checkpatch in your hook script?

	Hannes

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
  2011-03-23 10:07 ` Johannes Weiner
@ 2011-03-23 18:43   ` Sarah Sharp
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sarah Sharp @ 2011-03-23 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Johannes Weiner; +Cc: Andy Whitcroft, linux-kernel, James Bottomley

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:07:07AM +0100, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:13:10PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > There are a lot of warnings in checkpatch.pl that are rather subjective.
> > For instance, when a line is 81 characters long, and the patch submitter
> > is just cleaning up existing code, a maintainer may not care that
> > checkpatch.pl warns about the over 80-character line.  It should be up to
> > the maintainer what warnings they want to pay attention to.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, if you try to run checkpatch.pl as part of a git pre-commit
> > hook and a patch in a series being applied by git-am fails checkpatch.pl,
> > the whole process stops.  At that point I usually end up just disabling
> > that git hook, which means I don't see real errors in the patches.
> > 
> > Add an option to checkpatch.pl to print the warnings, but not return an
> > error code when the --lazy flag is present.  (Anyone with a better name
> > can pipe up, lazy just seemed to be the opposite to strict.)  This allows
> > the maintainer to view the warnings, but still allow the patch application
> > process to continue.
> 
> I first thought you would add code that allowed turning only select
> errors into warnings.
> 
> If you just want to have git continue in any case, why not append
> '|| true' to the line that invokes checkpatch in your hook script?

Because I still want to stop the patch application process if a true
error was found.  I just don't want to stop the patch application
process if just a warning was found.

Sarah Sharp

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
  2011-03-23  1:41   ` [RFC] checkpatch: " Steven Rostedt
@ 2011-03-24 15:40     ` Sarah Sharp
  2011-03-24 18:23       ` Steven Rostedt
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sarah Sharp @ 2011-03-24 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steven Rostedt; +Cc: Andy Whitcroft, linux-kernel, James Bottomley

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 09:41:17PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:22:46PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > > @@ -1096,6 +1099,9 @@ sub report {
> > >  
> > >  	push(our @report, $line);
> > >  
> > > +	if ($lazy == 1) {
> > > +		return 0;
> > > +	}
> > >  	return 1;
> > >  }
> > >  sub report_dump {
> 
> Instead of this hunk, have:
> 
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 58848e3..54ec3d9 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ for my $filename (@ARGV) {
>  	}
>  	close($FILE);
>  	if (!process($filename)) {
> -		$exit = 1;
> +		$exit = 1 if (!$lazy);
>  	}
>  	@rawlines = ();
>  	@lines = ();

Hmm, but isn't that going to skip returning an exit value if there's an
error as well?  I really do want it to fail if there's an error, just
not if there's a warning.

Sarah Sharp

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
  2011-03-24 15:40     ` Sarah Sharp
@ 2011-03-24 18:23       ` Steven Rostedt
  2011-03-24 22:02         ` Sarah Sharp
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Steven Rostedt @ 2011-03-24 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sarah Sharp; +Cc: Andy Whitcroft, linux-kernel, James Bottomley

On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 08:40 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 09:41:17PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:22:46PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > > > @@ -1096,6 +1099,9 @@ sub report {
> > > >  
> > > >  	push(our @report, $line);
> > > >  
> > > > +	if ($lazy == 1) {
> > > > +		return 0;
> > > > +	}
> > > >  	return 1;
> > > >  }
> > > >  sub report_dump {
> > 
> > Instead of this hunk, have:
> > 
> > 
> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > index 58848e3..54ec3d9 100755
> > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ for my $filename (@ARGV) {
> >  	}
> >  	close($FILE);
> >  	if (!process($filename)) {
> > -		$exit = 1;
> > +		$exit = 1 if (!$lazy);
> >  	}
> >  	@rawlines = ();
> >  	@lines = ();
> 
> Hmm, but isn't that going to skip returning an exit value if there's an
> error as well?  I really do want it to fail if there's an error, just
> not if there's a warning.

Ah, I was a bit confused as you had report return 0, which is used by
both errors and warnings.

Would you want something like this:

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 58848e3..40cbc2f 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -1109,7 +1109,7 @@ sub ERROR {
 }
 sub WARN {
 	if (report("WARNING: $_[0]\n")) {
-		our $clean = 0;
+		our $clean = 0 if (!$lazy);
 		our $cnt_warn++;
 	}
 }

-- Steve



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value.
  2011-03-24 18:23       ` Steven Rostedt
@ 2011-03-24 22:02         ` Sarah Sharp
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Sarah Sharp @ 2011-03-24 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steven Rostedt; +Cc: Andy Whitcroft, linux-kernel, James Bottomley

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 02:23:49PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 08:40 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 09:41:17PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 04:22:46PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > > > > @@ -1096,6 +1099,9 @@ sub report {
> > > > >  
> > > > >  	push(our @report, $line);
> > > > >  
> > > > > +	if ($lazy == 1) {
> > > > > +		return 0;
> > > > > +	}
> > > > >  	return 1;
> > > > >  }
> > > > >  sub report_dump {
> > > 
> > > Instead of this hunk, have:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > index 58848e3..54ec3d9 100755
> > > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ for my $filename (@ARGV) {
> > >  	}
> > >  	close($FILE);
> > >  	if (!process($filename)) {
> > > -		$exit = 1;
> > > +		$exit = 1 if (!$lazy);
> > >  	}
> > >  	@rawlines = ();
> > >  	@lines = ();
> > 
> > Hmm, but isn't that going to skip returning an exit value if there's an
> > error as well?  I really do want it to fail if there's an error, just
> > not if there's a warning.
> 
> Ah, I was a bit confused as you had report return 0, which is used by
> both errors and warnings.
> 
> Would you want something like this:
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 58848e3..40cbc2f 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -1109,7 +1109,7 @@ sub ERROR {
>  }
>  sub WARN {
>  	if (report("WARNING: $_[0]\n")) {
> -		our $clean = 0;
> +		our $clean = 0 if (!$lazy);
>  		our $cnt_warn++;
>  	}
>  }

Yes, that's basically what I did in the second revision of the patch,
although I didn't have enough perl skillz to know about the if (!$lazy)
syntax.

Sarah Sharp

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-24 22:02 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-22 23:13 [RFC] checkpatch: add option to change warning return value Sarah Sharp
2011-03-22 23:22 ` Sarah Sharp
2011-03-22 23:40   ` [RFC v2] Checkpatch: " Sarah Sharp
2011-03-23  1:41   ` [RFC] checkpatch: " Steven Rostedt
2011-03-24 15:40     ` Sarah Sharp
2011-03-24 18:23       ` Steven Rostedt
2011-03-24 22:02         ` Sarah Sharp
2011-03-23 10:07 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-03-23 18:43   ` Sarah Sharp

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).