From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: me@felipebalbi.com (Felipe Balbi) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 21:17:36 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 0/6] [v2] omap:mailbox-enhancements and fixes In-Reply-To: <4CDAEB5C.6000703@ti.com> References: <1289393121-7911-1-git-send-email-h-kanigeri2@ti.com> <4CDACB0E.3050403@ti.com> <4CDAEB5C.6000703@ti.com> Message-ID: <1289416656.16560.15.camel@eowin> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 19:58 +0100, Cousson, Benoit wrote: > My point was that checkpatch is supposed to check patch... but it's true > that is can check the code as well. I was assuming that all the code in > mainline is supposed to be already checkpatch proof :-) > It seems that this is not the case. > > It might be interesting to run it on every plat-omap / mach-omap files... you might be surprised with the results :-) -- balbi