From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753491AbcFLUc0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:32:26 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f172.google.com ([209.85.223.172]:35845 "EHLO mail-io0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752581AbcFLUcZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:32:25 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1465758279-16111-1-git-send-email-deepa.kernel@gmail.com> From: Deepa Dinamani Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:32:23 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] coccicheck: Allow for overriding spatch flags To: Julia Lawall Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Arnd Bergmann , Gilles Muller , Nicolas Palix , Michal Marek Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Documentation/coccinelle.txt suggests using the SPFLAGS >> make variable to pass additional options to spatch. >> >> Reorder the way SPFLAGS is added to FLAGS, to allow >> for options in the SPFLAGS to override the default >> --very-quiet option. >> >> Similarly, rearrage the FLAGS for org or report mode. >> This allows for overriding of the default --no-show-diff >> option through SPFLAGS. > > The first looks like a good idea, but do you find a use case for the > second? The diff that is shown in org or report mode may be sort of > random. It is just an easy hack to reuse the same pattern code for > context, org, and report modes, but there isn't an intent to see the diff > produced by context mode in org or report mode. I thought this at first, that org report mode wouldn't need it the diff. But if a user wishes to override the option, then why should we not accept that the user knows what they are doing? -Deepa