From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DBD53772 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 10:23:40 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id a197so153900903wmd.0 for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 01:23:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zJvqDMkImiWeB68DLgK9T+xe5tQrbltxbWOoP/wuROI=; b=okFHYDBtBEjwmdYiVxDJ9wntrcFVPxSpSZyxQhgA98eOnuy6y/aX05BRmSkMPq/Bxt ZdgOkvN2m7K+jlRTh6fgffTojPMD8rvXtCkz10j49MjrJRMJGR1d+16oPe01Ivt5EB+E EH31y3gndnoNeIWGfikF5s9AQ7XS5ZXq5421lBVSKm+NFGe17rr7sNHi9Q2IvdSOhmFT vtsL0dTKABZ+ippl56nRctj5vV7f/OdANBb1X/HulLulJovry0NdJ+nEJq4hMmyjtY62 bcAR20eRi+vutOXfknAPjGlitM0mCfK1uWnXlXxnyt9ErzJob52MbD5nBuGMwRtDULdL pMOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zJvqDMkImiWeB68DLgK9T+xe5tQrbltxbWOoP/wuROI=; b=iUgJDQa9cE7XfJpiOAG+VTdYSUOY+SveOwq8emaEkjh6BGH9rem3FNd+x6XgVPmq4y USOaVR/r3r3fEpvdVIw4R80MxsO5vP9EXfbw/Je6RFynQyrzOglDFXN39O/D0sCWXd98 kdwMjT/vuDn7l/DB5Mq1f0t7+TPz+J5i1y2ft68A6NFxHQAJeTfO9k8rdvvEXPzL6+Dg apUm7CjyKZrEVk8SqghkctZ63ufLQEGoD33YhG5oV71BL7i2TUUVWYHB70NLAqXhKdbL Ma5GQwsFLaV/ehx5RYt2iB3JN2YPFhnBCHAWD83HCDnc5xW2T7QTTKJryEk+BUH64owH J51A== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcnxZ2AnrLtQNuFlXPjqHN8RsnWHhdy81FJ61/OBjLPS/lgSSG1+WnulsSZnxKPk2JE X-Received: by 10.28.62.77 with SMTP id l74mr2448911wma.37.1479201820293; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 01:23:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x188sm3135586wmx.4.2016.11.15.01.23.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 15 Nov 2016 01:23:39 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Liu, Yong" Cc: ci@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 10:23:38 +0100 Message-ID: <2888549.A4ztrYCj9Y@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <86228AFD5BCD8E4EBFD2B90117B5E81E60326B6D@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <86228AFD5BCD8E4EBFD2B90117B5E81E60326B6D@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] check patch status duplicated in mailing list X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 09:23:40 -0000 2016-11-15 03:32, Liu, Yong: > Hi Thomas, > There're two checkpatch report in this mailing now. One of them is included in patchset status report. > These two reports are focusing on the same thing and sometimes mismatched in the result. > I guess it is caused by different version of checkpatch scripts have different rules, ours version is 0.32. > > Since newer checkpatch report has been integrated with patch work system. I suggest to remove checkpatch in patchset report. Looking for your option. Yes I was going to suggest to remove checkpatch from Intel checks. Also could we improve the check description? Test-Label: Intel Niantic on Fedora If it is doing only some compilation checks, it should be Test-Label: Intel compilation on Fedora Later this week, I would like to share the scripts used for checkpatch so that we can have the Intel checks integrated in patchwork. PS: moving this discussion on ci@dpdk.org We should post only the test reports on test-report@dpdk.org and discuss on ci@dpdk.org.