2017-11-17 2:01 GMT+09:00 Knut Omang <knut.omang@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> Add interpretation of a new environment variable P={1,2} in spirit of the
> C= option, but executing checkpatch instead of sparse.
>
> Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Åsmund Østvold <asmund.ostvold@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Makefile | 20 +++++++++++++++++++-
> scripts/Makefile.build | 13 +++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> index ccd9818..eb4bca9 100644
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -176,6 +176,20 @@ ifndef KBUILD_CHECKSRC
> KBUILD_CHECKSRC = 0
> endif
>
> +# Run scripts/checkpatch.pl with --ignore-cfg checkpatch.cfg
> +#
> +# Use 'make P=1' to enable checking of only re-compiled files.
> +# Use 'make P=2' to enable checking of *all* source files, regardless
> +#
> +# See the file "Documentation/dev-tools/run-checkpatch.rst" for more details,
> +#
> +ifeq ("$(origin P)", "command line")
> + KBUILD_CHECKPATCH = $(P)
> +endif
> +ifndef KBUILD_CHECKPATCH
> + KBUILD_CHECKPATCH = 0
> +endif
I am unhappy about adding a new interface
for each checker.
The default of CHECK is "sparse", but
users can override it to use another checker.
As Decumentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst says,
if you want to use coccinelle as a checker,
make C=1 CHECK="scripts/coccicheck"
Recently, I saw a patch to use scripts/kernel-doc as a checker.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10030521/
If I accept your patch,
we would end up with
KBUILD_CHECKPATCH,
KBUILD_CHECKCOCCI
KBUILD_CHECKDOC,
...
This is ugly.
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
