From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2018 14:59:43 +0000 Subject: Re: Software evolution around =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9Ccheckpatch=2Epl=E2=80=9D=3F?= Message-Id: <1518274783.6579.2.camel@perches.com> List-Id: References: <0406765c-bdd1-1a82-cf66-1c248063ae4f@users.sourceforge.net> <20180204112346.0977e938@archlinux> <9420fc82-1a37-3601-bafe-f57ef953bfcd@users.sourceforge.net> <87DF341A-1356-4B1B-8D25-14D5B0AAB01D@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk> <20180210145336.233c721d@archlinux> In-Reply-To: <20180210145336.233c721d@archlinux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jonathan Cameron , SF Markus Elfring Cc: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Cameron , Hartmut Knaack , Jiri Kosina , Lars-Peter Clausen , Peter Meerwald-Stadler , Srinivas Pandruvada , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2018-02-10 at 14:53 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > While it would be great to improve checkpatches false > positive rate, it's very nature as a string matcher makes > this hard. true. what are the false positives you see?