[BUG] checkpatch: false positive unwrapped commit description

The next line leads to a false positive Possible unwrapped commit description (prefer a maximum 75 chars per line) element type is ‘struct reg_info‘, not ‘u32‘ {aka ‘unsigned int‘} +|+|+|+|+|+|+| 10203040

Re: checkpatch: false positive "does MAINTAINERS need updating?" warning

On Mon, 2019-10-07 at 13:44 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > Hi Joe, > > > I ran checkpatch.pl against the following: > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1136334/ > > > I did update MAINTAINERS, but I still get > "does MAINTAINERS need updating?" warning. > Why? Because checkpatch is not

checkpatch: false positive "does MAINTAINERS need updating?" warning

Hi Joe, I ran checkpatch.pl against the following: https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1136334/ I did update MAINTAINERS, but I still get "does MAINTAINERS need updating?" warning. Why? $ scripts/checkpatch.pl 0001-doc-move-namespaces.rst-out-of-kbuild-directory.patch WARNING: added,

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:49 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:37 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:32 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > >

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:49 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:37 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:32 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > >

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:37 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:32 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > > > Hello! > > > > > > > > I got the following message from

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:37 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:32 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > > > Hello! > > > > > > > > I got the following message from

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:32 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > I got the following message from checkpatch: > > > > > > === > > > $ scripts/checkpatch.pl > > >

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:32 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > I got the following message from checkpatch: > > > > > > === > > > $ scripts/checkpatch.pl > > >

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > Hello! > > > > I got the following message from checkpatch: > > > > === > > $ scripts/checkpatch.pl > > 0001-netfilter-nf_log-don-t-hold-nf_log_mutex-during-user.patch > > WARNING:

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > > Hello! > > > > I got the following message from checkpatch: > > > > === > > $ scripts/checkpatch.pl > > 0001-netfilter-nf_log-don-t-hold-nf_log_mutex-during-user.patch > > WARNING:

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > Hello! > > I got the following message from checkpatch: > > === > $ scripts/checkpatch.pl > 0001-netfilter-nf_log-don-t-hold-nf_log_mutex-during-user.patch > WARNING: 'calle' may be misspelled - perhaps 'called'? > #15: > Fixes:

Re: checkpatch false positive (IMO): typo detected in truncated commit message

On Mon, 2018-06-25 at 17:22 +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > Hello! > > I got the following message from checkpatch: > > === > $ scripts/checkpatch.pl > 0001-netfilter-nf_log-don-t-hold-nf_log_mutex-during-user.patch > WARNING: 'calle' may be misspelled - perhaps 'called'? > #15: > Fixes:

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive storage class location

On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 23:08 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > On 07/04/2017 10:44 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 21:29 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > > The U-Boot project uses the same scripts/checkpatch.pl as the Linux > > > kernel. I ran upon the problem below when

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive storage class location

On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 23:08 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > On 07/04/2017 10:44 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 21:29 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > > The U-Boot project uses the same scripts/checkpatch.pl as the Linux > > > kernel. I ran upon the problem below when

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive storage class location

On 07/04/2017 10:44 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 21:29 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: >> The U-Boot project uses the same scripts/checkpatch.pl as the Linux >> kernel. I ran upon the problem below when working on U-Boot. But I >> guess it should be fixed in the Linux upstream.

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive storage class location

On 07/04/2017 10:44 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 21:29 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: >> The U-Boot project uses the same scripts/checkpatch.pl as the Linux >> kernel. I ran upon the problem below when working on U-Boot. But I >> guess it should be fixed in the Linux upstream.

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive storage class location

On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 21:29 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > The U-Boot project uses the same scripts/checkpatch.pl as the Linux > kernel. I ran upon the problem below when working on U-Boot. But I > guess it should be fixed in the Linux upstream. > > Running checkpatch for this email produces

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive storage class location

On Tue, 2017-07-04 at 21:29 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > The U-Boot project uses the same scripts/checkpatch.pl as the Linux > kernel. I ran upon the problem below when working on U-Boot. But I > guess it should be fixed in the Linux upstream. > > Running checkpatch for this email produces

[BUG] checkpatch: false positive storage class location

The U-Boot project uses the same scripts/checkpatch.pl as the Linux kernel. I ran upon the problem below when working on U-Boot. But I guess it should be fixed in the Linux upstream. Running checkpatch for this email produces WARNING: storage class should be at the beginning of the declaration

[BUG] checkpatch: false positive storage class location

The U-Boot project uses the same scripts/checkpatch.pl as the Linux kernel. I ran upon the problem below when working on U-Boot. But I guess it should be fixed in the Linux upstream. Running checkpatch for this email produces WARNING: storage class should be at the beginning of the declaration

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 04:36:28PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:29 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:13 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > Ping? I've hit some different false positives today on the same rule. > > > I'll stop bothering to report them if no

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:29 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:13 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > Ping? I've hit some different false positives today on the same rule. > > I'll stop bothering to report them if no one cares. > > Perhaps this: (minus the debugging this time...)

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:13 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > Ping? I've hit some different false positives today on the same rule. > I'll stop bothering to report them if no one cares. Perhaps this: diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index 9f0949b..196b77b 100755 ---

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

Ping? I've hit some different false positives today on the same rule. I'll stop bothering to report them if no one cares. On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:03:36AM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:48:27AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 14:43 -0800, Brian

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

Ping? I've hit some different false positives today on the same rule. I'll stop bothering to report them if no one cares. On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:03:36AM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:48:27AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 14:43 -0800, Brian

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:13 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > Ping? I've hit some different false positives today on the same rule. > I'll stop bothering to report them if no one cares. Perhaps this: diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index 9f0949b..196b77b 100755 ---

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:29 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:13 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > Ping? I've hit some different false positives today on the same rule. > > I'll stop bothering to report them if no one cares. > > Perhaps this: (minus the debugging this time...)

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 04:36:28PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:29 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 16:13 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > Ping? I've hit some different false positives today on the same rule. > > > I'll stop bothering to report them if no

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:48:27AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 14:43 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > Hi, > > > > What is the Blessed (TM) style for referencing commits that have quote > > characters in their subject line? e.g., this commit: > > > > commit

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 14:43 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi, > > What is the Blessed (TM) style for referencing commits that have quote > characters in their subject line? e.g., this commit: > > commit 43163022927b6e7d202a7e6f939c3f392465494d > Author: Brian Norris > Date: Tue May 19 14:38:22

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 14:43 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi, > > What is the Blessed (TM) style for referencing commits that have quote > characters in their subject line? e.g., this commit: > > commit 43163022927b6e7d202a7e6f939c3f392465494d > Author: Brian Norris

Re: [BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:48:27AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 14:43 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > Hi, > > > > What is the Blessed (TM) style for referencing commits that have quote > > characters in their subject line? e.g., this commit: > > > > commit

[BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

Hi, What is the Blessed (TM) style for referencing commits that have quote characters in their subject line? e.g., this commit: commit 43163022927b6e7d202a7e6f939c3f392465494d Author: Brian Norris Date: Tue May 19 14:38:22 2015 -0700 mtd: m25p80: allow arbitrary OF matching for

[BUG] checkpatch: false positive for commits with quote characters

Hi, What is the Blessed (TM) style for referencing commits that have quote characters in their subject line? e.g., this commit: commit 43163022927b6e7d202a7e6f939c3f392465494d Author: Brian Norris Date: Tue May 19 14:38:22 2015 -0700 mtd: m25p80: allow

Re: Checkpatch: False positive

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:58:56AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 16:43 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:35:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > #31: > > > > arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c | 198 > > > > ++--- >

Re: Checkpatch: False positive

On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 16:43 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:35:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > #31: > > > arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c | 198 > > > ++--- > > I guess those are in the limbo land between the end of message and >

Re: Checkpatch: False positive

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:35:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > #31: > > arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c | 198 > > ++--- I guess those are in the limbo land between the end of message and beginning of the patch itself. Perhaps the test should at least stop

Re: Checkpatch: False positive

On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 16:25 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Hi Andy/Joe, > > I got a warning today for my cover-letter, and it looked like a false > positive. Please have a look, based of v4.2-rc2. > --- > -cover-letter.patch > --- > WARNING: Possible

Checkpatch: False positive

Hi Andy/Joe, I got a warning today for my cover-letter, and it looked like a false positive. Please have a look, based of v4.2-rc2. --- -cover-letter.patch --- WARNING: Possible unwrapped commit description (prefer a maximum 75 chars per line) #31:

Checkpatch: False positive

Hi Andy/Joe, I got a warning today for my cover-letter, and it looked like a false positive. Please have a look, based of v4.2-rc2. --- -cover-letter.patch --- WARNING: Possible unwrapped commit description (prefer a maximum 75 chars per line) #31:

Re: Checkpatch: False positive

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:35:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: #31: arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c | 198 ++--- I guess those are in the limbo land between the end of message and beginning of the patch itself. Perhaps the test should at least stop at the

Re: Checkpatch: False positive

On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 16:25 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: Hi Andy/Joe, I got a warning today for my cover-letter, and it looked like a false positive. Please have a look, based of v4.2-rc2. --- -cover-letter.patch --- WARNING: Possible unwrapped

Re: Checkpatch: False positive

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:58:56AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 16:43 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:35:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: #31: arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c | 198 ++--- I guess

Re: Checkpatch: False positive

On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 16:43 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:35:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: #31: arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c | 198 ++--- I guess those are in the limbo land between the end of message and beginning of

Re: checkpatch false positive

Hi, On 10/21/2014 10:28 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2014-10-21 at 10:14 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Checkpatch gives the following warning: >> >> WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating? >> #31: >> new file mode 100644 >> >> total: 0 errors, 1

Re: checkpatch false positive

On Tue, 2014-10-21 at 10:14 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > Checkpatch gives the following warning: > > WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating? > #31: > new file mode 100644 > > total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 352 lines checked > >

Re: checkpatch false positive

On Tue, 2014-10-21 at 10:14 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Hi, Checkpatch gives the following warning: WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating? #31: new file mode 100644 total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 352 lines checked

Re: checkpatch false positive

Hi, On 10/21/2014 10:28 AM, Joe Perches wrote: On Tue, 2014-10-21 at 10:14 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: Hi, Checkpatch gives the following warning: WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating? #31: new file mode 100644 total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 352 lines

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch.pl: Fix checkpatch false positive due to ternary operator break

On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 21:41 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote: > From: David Ertman Hey David. > Using the intuitive breaking of a ternary operator used in the > initialization of a variable in its declaration: > > type var = FOO ? >BAR : >FEE; [] > type var = FOO >

[PATCH] checkpatch.pl: Fix checkpatch false positive due to ternary operator break

From: David Ertman Using the intuitive breaking of a ternary operator used in the initialization of a variable in its declaration: type var = FOO ? BAR : FEE; is causing a checkpatch warning: "WARNING:SPACING: networking uses a blank line after declarations" Checkpatch

[PATCH] checkpatch.pl: Fix checkpatch false positive due to ternary operator break

From: David Ertman davidx.m.ert...@intel.com Using the intuitive breaking of a ternary operator used in the initialization of a variable in its declaration: type var = FOO ? BAR : FEE; is causing a checkpatch warning: WARNING:SPACING: networking uses a blank line after

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch.pl: Fix checkpatch false positive due to ternary operator break

On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 21:41 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote: From: David Ertman davidx.m.ert...@intel.com Hey David. Using the intuitive breaking of a ternary operator used in the initialization of a variable in its declaration: type var = FOO ? BAR : FEE; [] type var =