On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 16:22 +0100, Jérôme Pouiller wrote: > > Patchwork also reports two warnings that I am going to ignore: > > - "Target tree name not specified in the subject", I assume it > is "wireless-next", but in the doubt I prefer to refrain. It should be wireless-next for anything that isn't fixes for the current cycle, and please do add it - without it the checker won't always be able to pick up the patches to test them: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/ec3a3d891acfe5ed8763271a1df4151d75daf25f.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > - Lines are larger then 80 columns. Checkpatch.pl now accepts up > to 100 columns. I am not aware any local exception in net/, right? It looks like that's not documented (https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-netdev.html), but I had a conversation with Jakub about this in the past and he prefers to have the checks still at 80 because people were, in his telling, abusing it in a way and making really long lines for no good reason. I'm not going to be super strict about it, but I'd encourage everyone who sees that warning to see if they can do better. In this particular case, it's just a comment, so could trivially be wrapped, but I'm not going to complain about 85 columns. If someone's going to 100 columns with (text) comments though then I think that'd raise some eyebrows. Narrower text is easier to read anyway. johannes
