From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751867AbdAYKIX (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 05:08:23 -0500 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:21949 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751690AbdAYKIV (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 05:08:21 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,283,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="813111934" From: Jani Nikula To: Markus Heiser Cc: Daniel Vetter , Jonathan Corbet , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Daniel Vetter , Matthew Wilcox , "linux-doc \@ vger . kernel . org List" , "linux-kernel \@ vger . kernel . org List" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 3/6] kernel-doc: add kerneldoc-lint command In-Reply-To: <87A4A201-EF33-459A-BC09-079844C4609C@darmarit.de> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo References: <1485287564-24205-1-git-send-email-markus.heiser@darmarit.de> <1485287564-24205-4-git-send-email-markus.heiser@darmarit.de> <20170125063846.ylhhbcqatsis2rny@phenom.ffwll.local> <87inp35z35.fsf@intel.com> <87A4A201-EF33-459A-BC09-079844C4609C@darmarit.de> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:08:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87bmuv5u5p.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, Markus Heiser wrote: > Am 25.01.2017 um 09:21 schrieb Jani Nikula : >> Yes, see below. It's simplistic and it has an external dependency, but >> it got the job done. And it does not depend on Sphinx; it's just a >> kernel-doc and rst lint, not Sphinx lint. Whether that's a good or a bad >> thing is debatable. >> >> Anyway, I do think the approach of making 'make CHECK=the-tool C=1' work >> is what we should aim at. > > Ah, cool ... didn't know C=1 before .. I will consider it in v2. > >> Markus' patch could probably be made to do >> that by accepting the same arguments that are passed to compilers. > > Is this what you mean? No. The build system passes the same (or roughly the same) arguments to the CHECK tool as it passes to the compiler. You need to handle them in your tool, possibly just ignoring them if they're not relevant. BR, Jani. > > make W=n [targets] Enable extra gcc checks, n=1,2,3 where > 1: warnings which may be relevant and do not occur too often > 2: warnings which occur quite often but may still be relevant > 3: more obscure warnings, can most likely be ignored > Multiple levels can be combined with W=12 or W=123 > > Thanks! > > --Markus-- > -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center