Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Extend CamelCase types and ignore existingCamelCase uses in a patch

[Joe Perches]

(sending for 3rd time, odd dns problems today, apologies for dupes)

On Wed, 2013-09-04 at 08:58 -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 10:25:21AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Extend the CamelCase words found to include structure members.
> > 
> > In https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/3/318 Sarah Sharp (mostly) wrote: 
> > 
> > "In general, if checkpatch.pl complains about a variable a patch
> > introduces that's CamelCase, you should pay attention to it.
> > Otherwise, [] ignore it."
> > 
> > So, if checking a patch, scan the original patched file if it's
> > available and add any preexisting CamelCase types so reuses do
> > not generate CamelCase messages.
[]
> Thanks!  Will this mean checkpatch.pl still complains on CamelCase names
> if it's run against a file?  I think that's still valuable.

Yes.

First, checkpatch looks for all existing CamelCase #defines,
typedefs, function names and struct/union members in the
include path.  (it uses regexes so it's actually not at all
close to even good at finding those).

It stores all those CamelCase uses in a hash.

If checkpatch is scanning a patch, it'll now read the file
being patched for existing uses of CamelCase #defines, etc,
and checkpatch adds those uses to the hash.

If checkpatch is scanning a file, it doesn't doesn't
prescan the file.

Then, when checkpatch scans the patch or file and finds a
CamelCase use, it looks for that use in the hash and is
silent if it's there, noisy otherwise.

This can still report CamelCase uses in a patch if say a
CamelCase type is defined in a .h file in the same directory
or some other include path and that word is not already used
by the file.

--
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/