On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Greg Donald <gdonald@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Lots of violations >> checkpatch finds are intentionally left in place because correcting >> them makes the code less readable, not more readable. > > Yeah, but there are still hundreds of thousands of checkpatch > violations throughout the kernel that if fixed would actually improve > readability. > > Path Errors Warnings > drivers 200979 361350 > arch 98791 142300 > sound 25938 31028 > include 13651 25598 > fs 96353 22483 > net 3185 19216 > lib 8055 6578 > tools 1126 3972 > kernel 656 3203 > security 47 1247 > mm 203 1186 > scripts 824 1168 > crypto 1144 1095 > block 196 656 > Documentation 97 259 > init 29 173 > virt 18 152 > samples 27 118 > ipc 2 77 > usr 17 20 > firmware 11 19 > > The WARNING "line over 80 characters" currently accounts for 216K of > the total violations. IMHO checkpatch should just stop complaining > about the 80 char limit since that's the main offender causing new > kernel developers to inadvertently lessen readability with their first > patch. If the 80 char warning should be mostly ignored why have it.. > it's pointless. Increase it to a 21st century value or kill it. > > > -- > Greg Donald I actually fixed this to improve code readability not for the kernel rules for your information. Cheers Nick _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
