Groups > linux.kernel > #1208471

Re: [RFC v5 00/26] Re-use nvram module

From	Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [RFC v5 00/26] Re-use nvram module
Date	2015-08-17 10:50 +0200
Message-ID	<pYohc-2c4-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<pQ2xb-6Hb-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pY2gF-49R-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <pYnEt-1sk-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <pYnXR-1P5-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Finn Thain 
> <fthain@telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
> >> BTW, checkpatch reported a few newly-introduced whitespace errors in 
> >> patches 03, 05, 16, 24, and 25.
> >
> > I will check again, but I'm sure those are all deliberate. I examined 
> > all the "errors" and "warnings" before submitting.
> >
> > checkpatch doesn't really understand the difference between whitespace 
> > used for indentation of statements (according to scope) and whitespace 
> > used for alignment of terms or parameters (when line-wrapped). Any 
> > tool that fails to make that distinction can't be depended upon to 
> > correctly validate the elisp in Documentation/CodingStyle, for 
> > example.
> 
> Checkpatch complains because you don't replace a sequence of 8 spaces by 
> a TAB in continuation lines.

Right. Were such a sequence used for indentation, a tab should be used 
instead. After those tabs, spaces are needed for alignment (see elisp 
example mentioned above).

But I sure wouldn't want to try to encode that distinction in regexp (as 
opposed to comparing a patch with its pretty-printed version, as might be 
generated by an actual C parser). So I expect some false positives from 
checkpatch.

-- 

> 
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
>                         Geert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [RFC v5 00/26] Re-use nvram module Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> - 2015-08-16 11:20 +0200
  Re: [RFC v5 00/26] Re-use nvram module Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au> - 2015-08-17 10:10 +0200
    Re: [RFC v5 00/26] Re-use nvram module Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> - 2015-08-17 10:30 +0200
      Re: [RFC v5 00/26] Re-use nvram module Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au> - 2015-08-17 10:50 +0200

csiph-web