From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753391Ab1JZXOs (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:14:48 -0400 Received: from perches-mx.perches.com ([206.117.179.246]:38522 "EHLO labridge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753181Ab1JZXOr (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:14:47 -0400 Message-ID: <1319670886.21924.22.camel@Joe-Laptop> Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: improve error message for p1-check From: Joe Perches To: David Rientjes Cc: Wolfram Sang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Cameron , Andy Whitcroft Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:14:46 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <1319027583-17842-1-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de> <1319669467.21924.18.camel@Joe-Laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.1- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 16:08 -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > The old error message was not precise. State now explicitly that the > > > > prefix exists as a file/directory. Also change the conclusion ("appears > > > > to be") into an instruction ("make sure"). > > > Why can't we suppress this warning unless both prefixes appear as files or > > > directories in the cwd? ('a' and 'b' if using git format-patch) > > I sent a suggested patch that checked $root/$patched_file > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/10/19/257 > So we need a combination of the two approaches then, it makes sense to > only emit the warning if the patched file exists in both prefixes. I don't think so. What about something like: $ diff -urN kernel/foo~ kernel/foo > patch I think we should only care about the patched file,.