[Cocci] [PATCH v4 1/1] runchecks: Generalize make C={1, 2} to support multiple checkers

[knut.omang@oracle.com (Knut Omang)]

On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 08:20 +0100, Knut Omang wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 16:03 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:

Hi Masahiro,

I know these are busy times but any hope of getting forward on this?
Anything more I can do to ease the process?

Thanks for your time,
Knut

> > 2018-02-05 15:41 GMT+09:00 Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>:
> > > On Fri, 2018-01-19 at 11:14 +0100, Knut Omang wrote:
> > >> Add scripts/runchecks which has generic support for running
> > >> checker tools in a convenient and user friendly way that
> > >> the author hopes can contribute to rein in issues detected
> > >> by these tools in a manageable and convenient way.
> > >>
> > >> scripts/runchecks provides the following basic functionality:
> > >>
> > >> * Makes it possible to selectively suppress output from individual
> > >>   checks on a per file or per subsystem basis.
> > >> * Unifies output and suppression input from different tools
> > >>   by providing a single unified syntax and presentation for the
> > >>   underlying tools in the style of "scripts/checkpatch.pl --show-types".
> > >> * Allows selective run of one, or more (or all) configured tools
> > >>   for each file.
> > >>
> > >> In the Makefile system, the sparse specific setup has been replaced
> > >> by setup for runchecks.
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > - Anything more I can/need to do to bring this forward?
> > > - Any quiet concerns?
> > >
> > > I realize it is a subsystem crossing change,
> > 
> > Is it?  Only Kbuild this is related to.
> 
> Ok, I see!
> 
> > > and a lot going on elsewhere,
> > > nevertheless I believe this is a time saver in the slightly longer run,
> > > as it allows automation of checking, even without a "perfect"
> > > code base to begin with.
> > >
> > 
> > Sorry for the delay.
> 
> I understand, no problem - just was afraid it was about to get lost 
> in between subsystems,
> 
> > I have not been able to find time to dive into the detail yet.
> > (Actually, I tried to do that for v2 or v3, where Python code was so dirty,
> > then consumed my time to figure out what the code was trying to do)
> 
> Hopefully v4 is cleaner from a Python code style point of view at least,
> but let me know if you have any particular part of the code in mind wrt 
> readability. Also hopefully the docs should be of help.
> 
> > I find my concern here:
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/5/497
> 
> I believe I have addressed the issues there in v4.
> 
> > Anyway, I will take a look again when I find some time.
> > You do not need to take care of the detail until I request to do so.
> 
> Ok, thanks a lot for your time and the quick response now!
> 
> Best regards,
> Knut
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html