From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756731Ab0JRPEG (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:04:06 -0400
Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:36106 "EHLO
	casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755763Ab0JRPEE convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:04:04 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: allow single space before labels
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <1287413933.29097.1608.camel@twins>
References: <1287302737-3507-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org>
	 <1287303678.20968.37.camel@Joe-Laptop>
	 <AANLkTimmSRS3eVsW4EZUxnE_rfjeqmmgGnjtWbn3J_nY@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1287310889.1998.153.camel@laptop> <1287334498.20968.53.camel@Joe-Laptop>
	 <1287343839.1998.699.camel@laptop>
	 <AANLkTikaxf-Fh9qUxsXNO5=r+SoxbzYXvCjFcHQLcXjy@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1287345710.1998.735.camel@laptop>
	 <AANLkTimixEGQTYrM7ShodtKeC97e0uPNRhWQn8F+-Nui@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20101018143935.GA4120@thunk.org>  <20101018145400.GD4120@thunk.org>
	 <1287413933.29097.1608.camel@twins>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:03:46 +0200
Message-ID: <1287414226.29097.1612.camel@twins>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 16:58 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 10:54 -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> > Note that there is absolutely nothing about how labels should be
> > indented in CodingStyle at all, and I very much resist code
> > straightjackets being imposed by checkpatch.pl implementors.
> > 
> > Can we please stop this nonsense? 
> 
> 1) ignoring checkpatch over taste is good
> 2) by 1) its impossible to get checkpatch right
> 3) therefore pure checkpatch patches are nonsense
> 
> So can we agree that checkpatch is ok in its current form, and we should
> simply administer physical violence towards checkpatch wankers?
> 
> PS. I frequently practise 2).

That should be 1) of course.. I frequently ignore checkpatch output.