From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10] devtools: alert on new instances of
	rte_panic and rte_exit
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 01:15:35 +0200
Message-ID: <5570581.lEyTUYlapn@xps>
References: <1524723664-30510-11-git-send-email-arnon@qwilt.com>
 <5254321.ZC84c43z8L@xps>
 <CAKy9EB2oeVFHW+mDY++ggf0z=hsmH+0Qwjg8FJevVm_cuNR=5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, "Lu,
 Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>, "Doherty, Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
 jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53ED62BD8
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 01:15:46 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKy9EB2oeVFHW+mDY++ggf0z=hsmH+0Qwjg8FJevVm_cuNR=5Q@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

27/05/2018 22:34, Arnon Warshavsky:
> This is consuming stdin.
> > I guess the checkpatch.pl will have nothing to check in the next step.
> > We should merge Neil's patch first, because he is adding a tmpfile
> > to solve the issue of stdin read only once.
> >
> 
> Yup. Missed the fact stdin is consumed. temp file is a good idea
> 
> >
> > > +             [ $? -eq 0 ] || return 0
> >
> > This test looks reversed: if the result is not 0, we should not return 0.
> > And by the way, I think it is better to continue with other checks.
> > Neil's patch is setting ret=1, continue and return at the end.
> >
> > >               report=$($DPDK_CHECKPATCH_PATH $options - 2>/dev/null)
> >
> 
> As it was agreed that this check should only warn and not fail the tests,
> The actual situation is that the function check_forbidden_additions()
> always returns zero.
> Once Neils patch is in, I can align to the return value propagation,
> but the current code never fails  (that may change of course for future
> different tokens)

Neil's patch is merged. Please would you like to resume your work?