From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753210Ab0CTSDo (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:03:44 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:33211 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753073Ab0CTSDn (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:03:43 -0400 Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:03:36 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Tilman Schmidt Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, apw@canonical.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add check for too short Kconfig descriptions Message-ID: <20100320180336.GT20695@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20100320023216.GA917@basil.fritz.box> <4BA4CE32.1020207@imap.cc> <20100320140710.GS20695@one.firstfloor.org> <4BA504DD.2060107@imap.cc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BA504DD.2060107@imap.cc> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 06:24:45PM +0100, Tilman Schmidt wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Am 2010-03-20 15:07 schrieb Andi Kleen: > > The warning merely is intended to get people to think > > about that. Yes it cannot enforce it directly. > > Then change the wording, at least. With the current wording, people will > think, "But I did!", and complain about a false positive on LKML, where > they will be annoyed to learn that checkpatch.pl's criterion for > "describing fully" is "having at least four lines". Change to what? If you have a better suggestion I can change it. > > But even with a better wording, I think the warning will still do more > harm than good. We have to agree to disagree on that then. > > > Yes it's not a perfect measure and can be circumvented. But hopefully > > most users would not. > > I'm not thinking of circumvention, but of well-meaning authors writing > long explanations that describe everything the author found worth > mentioning, but still don't answer the essential question: "Should I > select that option?" In fact, most of the unhelpful Kconfig help texts > I've encountered where longer than four lines. :-) I don't disagree that longer help texts can be unhelpful too, but at least there's some chance that they are. For a single sentence it's very unlikely ever that it's helpful. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.