Re: [x86] is checkpatch.pl broken

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Sun Dec 30 2007 - 12:23:22 EST



* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> orig:
> mbr_base = (buf_base+sector_size-1) & ~(sector_size-1);
> new (could be):
> mbr_base = (buf_base + sector_size - 1) & ~(sector_size - 1);
>
> Is a new version that bad?

it's certainly acceptable as newly introduced code but only borderline
better than the original code. I'd suggest to stick to the problem areas
that checkpatch.pl complains about at the moment - we have really
obvious bad looking pieces of code that checkpatch.pl reports, and going
after the borderline cases will only result in coding-style lawyering
and flamewars, not any genuine increase in code quality ;-)

for example:

arch/x86/kernel/bootflag.c:

total: 19 errors, 2 warnings, 98 lines checked

or:

arch/x86/kernel/apm_32.c:

total: 56 errors, 31 warnings, 2402 lines checked

and once we have nothing but the borderline cases and if we get really
bored we can start coding style flamewars ;-)

Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/