From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gerlando Falauto <gerlando.falauto@keymile.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:10:22 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] checkpatch compliance
In-Reply-To: <CANr=Z=Y+Q6AoJ-+gkc+YDeAPGcLsaQkPCzAmhJcRNwts9jXJzw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANr=Z=Y+Q6AoJ-+gkc+YDeAPGcLsaQkPCzAmhJcRNwts9jXJzw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EC56A2E.2000708@keymile.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On 10/08/2011 12:28 AM, Joe Hershberger wrote:
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> I'm attempting to make the files I touched in several recent
> patch-series chechkpatch.pl compliant.
>
> I've hit several cases which fail and probably shouldn't.  For each of
> these cases, should the warning / error just be ignored or reported to
> checkpatch maintainers or altered some other way?
>

What is wrong with something like:

ERROR: do not initialise statics to 0 or NULL
#35: FILE: serial.c:32:
+static struct serial_device *serial_devices = NULL;

ERROR: do not initialise statics to 0 or NULL
#36: FILE: serial.c:33:
+static struct serial_device *serial_current = NULL;

Since it's a bootloader, should we also ignore it with:

--ignore INITIALISED_STATIC

Or maybe not?

Thanks,
Gerlando