From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754544AbYDIIaP (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 04:30:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752394AbYDIIaB (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 04:30:01 -0400 Received: from hellhawk.shadowen.org ([80.68.90.175]:3584 "EHLO hellhawk.shadowen.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752297AbYDIIaA (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 04:30:00 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 09:30:13 +0100 From: Andy Whitcroft To: Andi Kleen Cc: Jan Engelhardt , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [patch] checkpatch: relax spacing and line length Message-ID: <20080409083013.GJ17915@shadowen.org> References: <20080408171257.GF17915@shadowen.org> <87ej9gp6ol.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20080409081943.GI17915@shadowen.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080409081943.GI17915@shadowen.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 09:19:43AM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 08:01:14PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Andy Whitcroft writes: > > > > > > To justify changing checkpatch to loosen its checks I would hope to see > > > an agreed to change to the CodingStyle detailing actually what is now > > > acceptable. > > > > Here was a concrete proposal (with patch for CodingStyle) from my side some > > time ago: > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/644306 > > Yeah, that was a good example of how to go about changinging things. As > I said on that thread I would happily change checkpatch to follow suit. > Oddly for a CodingStyle discussion there was very "discussion" at all. > It feels like people are scared of the passion that often errupts in > discussions over style. > > On that particular suggestion, I would probabally be in favour, and > slightly happier to have the string on the printk line for consistency > even though that would violate the "don't hide information" rule. Oh, and if people felt that the concensus was for something to be implemented and that you are waiting for me to implement the change in checkpatch; please say so. -apw