Hi Greg, On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 10:02 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 06:36:39AM -0700, bluez.test.bot@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email! > > > > Dear submitter, > > > > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list. > > This is a CI test results with your patch series: > > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=488173 > > > > ---Test result--- > > > > Test Summary: > > CheckPatch FAIL 0.77 seconds > > GitLint PASS 0.12 seconds > > BuildKernel PASS 529.82 seconds > > TestRunner: Setup PASS 311.54 seconds > > TestRunner: l2cap-tester PASS 2.46 seconds > > TestRunner: bnep-tester PASS 1.76 seconds > > TestRunner: mgmt-tester PASS 26.34 seconds > > TestRunner: rfcomm-tester PASS 1.97 seconds > > TestRunner: sco-tester PASS 1.94 seconds > > TestRunner: smp-tester PASS 2.03 seconds > > TestRunner: userchan-tester PASS 1.92 seconds > > > > Details > > ############################## > > Test: CheckPatch - FAIL - 0.77 seconds > > Run checkpatch.pl script with rule in .checkpatch.conf > > Bluetooth: fix the erroneous flush_work() order > > WARNING: Invalid email format for stable: 'stable <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>', prefer 'stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' > > #26: > > Cc: stable <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > WARNING: From:/Signed-off-by: email name mismatch: 'From: linma <linma@xxxxxxxxxx>' != 'Signed-off-by: Lin Ma <linma@xxxxxxxxxx>' > > > > total: 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 checks, 14 lines checked > > > > NOTE: For some of the reported defects, checkpatch may be able to > > mechanically convert to the typical style using --fix or --fix-inplace. > > > > "[PATCH] Bluetooth: fix the erroneous flush_work() order" has style problems, please review. > > > > NOTE: If any of the errors are false positives, please report > > them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. > > > > > > Do these matter enough for me to do a v3? Nah, we treat checkpatch as just informational I didn't know it actually checked the git patch description. > The first one is crazy, the second one, well, I can understand... I wonder why checkpatch is even doing something like that, anyway I believe the CI just runs checkpatch from mainline. > > thanks, > > greg k-h -- Luiz Augusto von Dentz
