From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scripts: add checkpatch wrapper
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:24:31 +0000
Message-ID: <20151029132430.GA13416@bricha3-MOBL3>
References: <1445615606-3885-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
 <1445615606-3885-2-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
 <CALwxeUvDzX=ZvVQUa+vu6gUKF5GV9qxZ1J6gpqWuAcXrt9m7Vg@mail.gmail.com>
 <3011581.XzQahXhfO1@xps13>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48D688DAE
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 14:24:34 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3011581.XzQahXhfO1@xps13>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 02:03:59PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-10-29 13:33, David Marchand:
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > +for p in "$@" ; do
> > > +       printf -- "\n### $p\n\n"
> > > +       report=$($DPDK_CHECKPATCH_PATH $options "$p" 2>/dev/null)
> > > +       [ $? -ne 0 ] || continue
> > > +       printf '%s\n' "$report" | head -n -6
> > > +       status=$(($status + 1))
> > > +done
> > > +exit $status
> > >
> > 
> > I prefer when checking scripts only complain when something is wrong :-)
> > So I would only display the file name if checkpatch complains.
> 
> Yes I'll move the first printf after the "continue".

Ok, but perhaps instead we can get a print at the end of how many files were
checked. I'm concerned about the case where we think we have checked something and
it's ok, when in fact we have actually had an error in our command and e.g. not checked
any files at all. The printing of the filename helps give a guarantee that the
script is doing the right thing, so if it goes away, I'd hope for some other method
to ensure that.

/Bruce