On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 05:05:38PM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> writes: > > > Until now checkpatch warnings have not said how long a too-long line is > > or what word might be misspelled. This commit makes the messages more > > explicit. > > > > To do this the 'print' functions needed to know the line that was in error. > > One way to do that was to also pass the line in question to the 'print' > > function. I decided instead to just allow the 'print' function to be > > missing and to instead issue these warnings from the 'check' function. I > > don't know whether this design raises any red flags with anyone. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> > > --- > > Thanks, Ben! > > I looked into one alternative which is to use the 'inspect' module and > populate arguments to the print function if it took them. Then I > realized that way lies the path to madness, as it will require a lot of > care and feeding for little benefit that I see right now. So with that, > I'm fine with warning prints happening in the check functions. If it > proves to be too burdensome, we can always investigate another way of > structuring it. For now, I especially appreciate the additional > specificity in the misspelling check. > > I lost my group of broken patches that I used to test, so until I rig > up a few I hope that my limited run is okay. I have attached an > incremental to fold in that fixes an error in the print call. > > Acked-by: Aaron Conole <[email protected]>
Thanks for the review and the fix (I'm an idiot). I applied this to master. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
