From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45836) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eXRHE-0000YG-Ub for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Jan 2018 07:39:13 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eXRHB-0001gG-RF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Jan 2018 07:39:12 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-x232.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::232]:37146) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eXRHB-0001fU-KB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Jan 2018 07:39:09 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-x232.google.com with SMTP id f140so2229431wmd.2 for ; Fri, 05 Jan 2018 04:39:09 -0800 (PST) References: <1514940265-18093-1-git-send-email-mjc@sifive.com> <151494290795.165.10006581095663113372@5adcb62bf0d6> <20180103024112.GA25758@localhost.localdomain> <20180103030556.GA27755@localhost.localdomain> <87mv1scyp1.fsf@linaro.org> <20180105122501.GB8592@lemon.usersys.redhat.com> From: Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= In-reply-to: <20180105122501.GB8592@lemon.usersys.redhat.com> Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2018 12:39:07 +0000 Message-ID: <87lghccwes.fsf@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 00/21] RISC-V QEMU Port Submission v1 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Fam Zheng Cc: Bastian Koppelmann , Michael Clark , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Sagar Karandikar Fam Zheng writes: > On Fri, 01/05 11:49, Alex Benn=C3=A9e wrote: >> >> Fam Zheng writes: >> >> > On Wed, 01/03 15:54, Michael Clark wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Fam Zheng wrote: >> >> >> >> > On Wed, 01/03 15:00, Michael Clark wrote: >> >> > > So it's essentially one error, the single line case pattern for >> >> > > table-driven decode which flags for long lines and asks to separa= te break >> >> > > onto its own line. >> >> >> > Thanks for taking a look! Practically, consistency with the rest of= the >> >> > code and >> >> > human judgements (comments, explanation in replies etc.) often over= ride the >> >> > checkpatch complaints. Checkpatch is not always right. >> >> >> Fam, >> >> I wonder is there anyway we could signal to patchew that there are some >> acknowledged and approved coding style variances in the patch? Would >> something like: >> >> CodingStyleExceptions: 12 >> >> Be too polluting to the commit messages? Or perhaps something that can >> skip individual tests on a given run: >> >> CheckpatchFlags: --ignore-long-lines > > It sounds feasible. Putting these flags after a --- line will keep commit > message clean. > > OTOH I think we should spend effort on patching checkpatch.pl to > implement this. I guess your right, given checkpatch is going to ingest the patch anyway. > > Fam -- Alex Benn=C3=A9e