linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Generating patches and using checkpatch.pl

To: Daniel Laird <daniel.j.laird@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: Generating patches and using checkpatch.pl
From: Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:45:21 +0200
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <4683C792.4000100@nxp.com>
Mail-followup-to: Daniel Laird <daniel.j.laird@nxp.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <4683C792.4000100@nxp.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
On Thu, 2007-06-28 15:37:06 +0100, Daniel Laird <daniel.j.laird@nxp.com> wrote:
> I ran checkpatch.pl as Ralf suggested before.
[...]
> - Line over 80 chars
> - printk must have KERN_ debug level
> - must have a space after this (, or *)
> - use tabs not spaces
> - Do not use C99 comments.
> To name but a few
> 
> My question is:
> If you do a patch and find all these errors is it expected that I fix 
> all these problems, or I just make sure my changes do not make it worse!

General rules of thumb:

  * Keep the coding style of the file if you're only doing minor
    patching. Don't introduce leading whitespace, leading tabs before
    spaces. Maybe keep the comment and indention style.

  * If it's more like a rewrite, fix it entirely.

MfG, JBG

-- 
      Jan-Benedict Glaw      jbglaw@lug-owl.de              +49-172-7608481
Signature of:                 Gib Dein Bestes. Dann übertriff Dich selbst!
the second  :

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>