From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759262AbYA1O7S (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:59:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754463AbYA1O7I (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:59:08 -0500 Received: from hellhawk.shadowen.org ([80.68.90.175]:1284 "EHLO hellhawk.shadowen.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753605AbYA1O7H (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:59:07 -0500 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:59:11 +0000 From: Andy Whitcroft To: Andi Kleen Cc: rdunlap@xenotime.net, jschopp@austin.ibm.com, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Deprecate checkpatch.pl --file mode; add warning; add --file-force Message-ID: <20080128145911.GJ12910@shadowen.org> References: <20080116222121.GA7185@wotan.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080116222121.GA7185@wotan.suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 11:21:21PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Deprecate checkpatch.pl --file mode; add warning; add --file-force > > As discussed on linux-kernel checkpatch.pl only patches for whole > files have a significant cost. Better such changes should be only > done together with other changes. Add a explicit warning about > this; deprecate --file and add a --file-force instead. > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen Cirtainly I can see why we want this warning out there and very much in the submitters face, it just feels a little heavy handed to make them change option to get the result. Would not just always appending this message in --file mode always be just as effective? Perhaps suppressing it with -q, or with some new "i know what I am doing" option? -apw