On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 01:26:56AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:17:30 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > can we please add this to checkpatch.pl ?
> >
> > > -spinlock_t bpci_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
> > > +DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bpci_lock);
>
> That check is already in checkpatch. Problem is that hardly anyone
> runs the thing.
>
> I think we're ready to wire checkpatch up to a email robot which monitors
> the mailing lists and sends people nastygrams. I bet that'll be popular ;)
That shouldn't be too hard. checkpatch has been subscribed since birth
but short circuiting the replies to me only.
I guess the main question is whether to reply-all or reply just to the
sender when commenting on patches. Perhaps for the sanity of the rest
of the world, just the sender makes most sense.
> (I'd love it if it could detect wordwrapped and tab-expanded patches, too.
> You wouldn't _believe_...)
It should pick up both of these, the word-wrapping is already there as
we detect lines within patch segments which don't start '[ +-]', the
tab-expanded should be picked up as every line would be "don't use
spaces use tabs for indent".
-apw
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
