From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [patch] checkpatch: remove the ether_addr_copy warning Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:47:29 +0300 Message-ID: <20141003144729.GK23154@mwanda> References: <20141003093505.GA7393@mwanda> <1412346147.3247.97.camel@joe-AO725> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andy Whitcroft , Andrew Morton , netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org To: Joe Perches Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1412346147.3247.97.camel@joe-AO725> Sender: kernel-janitors-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 07:22:27AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 12:35 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > Most people sending checkpatch.pl fixes don't know how to verify the > > alignment. This checkpatch warning just encourages newbies to try > > introduce bugs. Patch submitters tell us that they just sed the code > > and it's the job for the maintainer to check that it's correct. > > I haven't seen many instances of bad patch submittals > on netdev. Is this mostly an issue for staging? I don't follow netdev so I can't say. Most of the time data is aligned at a 4 byte mark so probably you are just getting lucky. I really doubt that netdev checkpatch newbies know about alignment... > > Maybe a downgrade to CHK requiring --strict is OK. I would actually like to turn --strict by default in staging. Checkpatch is a good concept, but it should only do safe things instead of telling newbies to send buggy patches. regards, dan carpenter