* Manish Katiyar <mkatiyar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Below patch removes some errors generated by checkpatch.pl in
> kernel/signal.c. Caught by Ingo's code-quality script.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Manish Katiyar <mkatiyar@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/signal.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
Note, your patch has line-wrap problems, such as:
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -89,20 +89,20 @@ static inline int has_pending_signals(sigset_t
> *signal, sigset_t *blocked)
> switch (_NSIG_WORDS) {
Causing:
patch: **** malformed patch at line 23: *signal, sigset_t *blocked)
See Documentation/email-clients.txt.
Also, kernel/signal.c needs a thorough cleanup, and your patch only
handles about a third of the errors+warnings:
before: total: 61 errors, 28 warnings, 3 checks, 2615 lines checked
after: total: 30 errors, 24 warnings, 3 checks, 2614 lines checked
If then it's best to bring the count down very close to zero (so
that only the obvious checkpatch false positives are left), and also
have a really good human-coder look at signal.c's:
- structure and code flow
- variable naming
- include files section
- general splitup and function ordering
- comment style consistency
etc. - to turn it into a really modern, nice-to-look-at and hackable
Linux kernel file.
The checkpatch motivated cleanups really only tell us half of the
story that is usually in such a long-forgotten file - and by fixing
the checkpatch warnings only it gives us a false impression of
cleanliness. So the checkpatch fixes should go hand in hand with
more grounds-up cleanups. (which can all still stay at the pure
style level, so that the .o output does not change - for easy
verification.)
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
