On Tue, 2017-12-12 at 08:43 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sat, Dec 09, 2017 at 09:00:18AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Sat, 2017-12-09 at 09:36 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > 1. Using lockdep_set_novalidate_class() for anything other > > > than device->mutex will throw checkpatch warnings. Nice. (*) > > [] > > > (*) checkpatch.pl is considered mostly harmful round here, too, > > > but that's another rant.... > > > > How so? > > Short story is that it barfs all over the slightly non-standard > coding style used in XFS. [] > This sort of stuff is just lowest-common-denominator noise - great > for new code and/or inexperienced developers, but not for working > with large bodies of existing code with slightly non-standard > conventions. Completely reasonable. Thanks. Do you get many checkpatch submitters for fs/xfs? If so, could probably do something about adding a checkpatch file flag to the directory or equivalent. Maybe add something like: fs/xfs/.checkpatch where the contents turn off most everything -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
