On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 07:11:34PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 12/09/2017 18:51, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > Currently before submitting a series, devs should run checkpatch.pl > > across each patch to be submitted. This can be automated using a > > command such as: > > > > git rebase -i master -x 'git show | ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -' > > > > This is rather long winded to type, so this patch introduces a way > > to tell checkpatch.pl to validate a series of GIT revisions. > > > > If checkpatch.pl is given a single argument that contains a literal > > '..', this is interpreted as a GIT revision list. > > > > For example: > > > > $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl master.. > > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 297 lines checked > > > > b886d352a2bf58f0996471fb3991a138373a2957 has no obvious style problems > > and is ready for submission. > > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 182 lines checked > > > > 2a731f9a9ce145e0e0df6d42dd2a3ce4dfc543fa has no obvious style problems > > and is ready for submission. > > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 102 lines checked > > > > 11844169bcc0c8ed4449eb3744a69877ed329dd7 has no obvious style problems > > and is ready for submission. > > > > If a genuine patch filename contains the characters '..' it is > > possible to force interpretation of the arg as a patch > > > > $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --patch master.. > > > > will force it to load a patch file called "master.." > > Looks good, but why no --branch anymore? :) (I can also try adding it > back on top).
It felt redundant to me. I guess it could be used to force interpretation of the arg as a git revlist, even if it lacks '..' ? Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
