On 16 March 2017 at 15:27, Aaron Conole <[email protected]> wrote: > Teach checkpatch to find misspellings based on the enchant framework. > When a potential error is found, print some additional suggestions for > fixups. > > Some additional keywords are kept in an extras list and added to the > dictionary specific to the Open vSwitch project. > > Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <[email protected]> > Cc: Russell Bryant <[email protected]> > Cc: Joe Stringer <[email protected]> > Cc: Eric Garver <[email protected]> > --- > NOTE: This is RFC for a few reasons. I'm not sure the use - and there > is probably some cleanup that needs to happen around tags, etc. > Additionally, I hope to get some feedback on a good enough set of extra > keywords.
Overall I'm a bit ambivalent about it. Not sure how important it really is. > utilities/checkpatch.py | 42 +++ > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/utilities/checkpatch.py b/utilities/checkpatch.py > index 26eb5c3..4e0d319 100755 > --- a/utilities/checkpatch.py > +++ b/utilities/checkpatch.py > @@ -24,6 +24,23 @@ __warnings = 0 > print_file_name = None > checking_file = False > > +spell_check_patch = True > +spell_check_dict = None > + > +try: > + import enchant > + > + extra_keywords = ['ovs', 'vswitch', 'vswitchd', 'ovs-vswitchd', 'netdev', > + 'selinux', 'ovs-ctl', 'dpctl', 'ofctl', 'openvswitch', > + 'dpdk', 'hugepage', 'hugepages'] I can think of a few extra words - OpenFlow, revalidator, xlate, mf_field, mf_fields, geneve, TLV, tun_metadata... Makes me a bit concerned that there are just way too many jargon words that this checker may complain about. We could try to cover a reasonable set, and then rather than printing a warning, print it as an info comment to just request the submitter to validate they haven't misspelled anything. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
