From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55017 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q61BZ-0000zX-3P
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 02 Apr 2011 09:48:18 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1Q61BX-0000g2-Ga
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 02 Apr 2011 09:48:16 -0400
Received: from mail-gw0-f45.google.com ([74.125.83.45]:42187)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1Q61BX-0000fq-Aw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 02 Apr 2011 09:48:15 -0400
Received: by gwb19 with SMTP id 19so2067439gwb.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 02 Apr 2011 06:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4D960A7E.5060503@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <1301671255-27717-1-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<AANLkTi=+XcYfjGdvh_VxEomJMX3zSoYUZx9-wPtpVE0c@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTik2sBYGEVv6N4ZeATFK8qNZjAOXeBJVQaoya6ZX@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=_MKeak8yy+GFLjdLd4mV9vbkDKQ2BEA-GEBr1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D96038B.3020703@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<20110401170151.GA15214@stefanha-thinkpad.localdomain>
	<4D960A7E.5060503@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 14:48:14 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTiku1WJgZ7dWNvZydapi-jCrHCRb88F7=0a5=gVB@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] checkpatch.pl: warn on C99 comments, but don't fail
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 04/01/2011 12:01 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:55:39AM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd prefer to only document "strict" guidelines, and treat
>>> checkpatch.pl warnings ("suggestions") as an extra "reward" you get
>>> for taking the time to run it.
>>
>> I don't want to be punished for running checkpatch.pl like I'm supposed
>> to while those who don't can get away with more.
>
> You're not! These are extra morsels of goodness :)
>
>>
>> A --pedantic mode would be fine although probably no one besides the
>> author would use it :).
>
> True :) But you're right, this is probably the better approach. How bout:
>
> --warnings: print coding style warnings in addition to errors, and exit
> failure if encountered
>
> Then default to suppressing warning statements, and --no-fail-on-warn
> behavior.

Sounds good to me :).

Stefan