[PATCH 1/2] doc: Recommend "--no-signoff" when invoking checkpatch.pl

[PATCH 1/2] doc: Recommend "--no-signoff" when invoking checkpatch.pl

[Mat Martineau]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1471 bytes --]

---
 doc/coding-style.txt | 12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/coding-style.txt b/doc/coding-style.txt
index c362eef..6b1c44a 100644
--- a/doc/coding-style.txt
+++ b/doc/coding-style.txt
@@ -11,13 +11,13 @@ can get a passport for your patch ASAP.
 First of all, the Embedded Linux Library coding style must follow every rule
 for the Linux kernel (http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/CodingStyle).
 There also exists a tool named checkpatch.pl to help you check the compliance
-with it. Just type "checkpatch.pl --no-tree patch_name" to check your patch.
+with it. Just type "checkpatch.pl --no-tree --no-signoff patch_name" to check
+your patch.
 
-In theory, you need to clean up all the warnings and errors except this
-one: "ERROR: Missing Signed-off-by: line(s)".  ell does not used Signed-Off
-lines, so including them is actually an error.  In certain circumstances one
-can ignore the 80 character per line limit.  This is generally only allowed if
-the alternative would make the code even less readable.
+In theory, you need to clean up all the warnings and errors.  In
+certain circumstances one can ignore the 80 character per line limit.
+This is generally only allowed if the alternative would make the code
+even less readable.
 
 Besides the kernel coding style above, the ell has special
 flavors for its own. Some of them are mandatory (marked as 'M'), while
-- 
2.7.0

[PATCH 2/2] build: Undefine _FORTIFY_SOURCE when building without optimization

[Mat Martineau]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 840 bytes --]

'./configure --disable-optimization --enable-maintainer-mode' would
claim that signalfd was not available. _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires that
optimization is enabled and issues a compile-time warning which is
treated as an error. Disabling optimization takes precedence over
fortification in this case, since it is being explicitly requested.
---
 configure.ac | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index f074081..39755fe 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ LT_INIT([disable-static])
 AC_ARG_ENABLE(optimization, AC_HELP_STRING([--disable-optimization],
 			[disable code optimization through compiler]), [
 	if (test "${enableval}" = "no"); then
-		CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -O0"
+		CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -O0"
 	fi
 ])
 
-- 
2.7.0

Re: [PATCH 2/2] build: Undefine _FORTIFY_SOURCE when building without optimization

[Denis Kenzior]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 538 bytes --]

Hi Mat,

On 02/10/2016 05:48 PM, Mat Martineau wrote:
> './configure --disable-optimization --enable-maintainer-mode' would
> claim that signalfd was not available. _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires that
> optimization is enabled and issues a compile-time warning which is
> treated as an error. Disabling optimization takes precedence over
> fortification in this case, since it is being explicitly requested.
> ---
>   configure.ac | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>

Applied, thanks.

Regards,
-Denis

Re: [PATCH 1/2] doc: Recommend "--no-signoff" when invoking checkpatch.pl

[Denis Kenzior]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 206 bytes --]

Hi Mat,

On 02/10/2016 05:48 PM, Mat Martineau wrote:
> ---
>   doc/coding-style.txt | 12 ++++++------
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>

Applied, thanks.

Regards,
-Denis