Re: [dpdk-dev] checkpatch.pl inconsistent results

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>]

2017-02-25 11:54, Legacy, Allain:
> Hi,
> I sent a patchset to the to the mailing list last night for which I received several coding style warnings.   Having discovered that I was using an older version of checkpatch.pl I downloaded the latest and set out to fix the warnings.  The tool is flagging the usage of PRIx64 and PRIu64 in debug logs as camelcase warnings.  I am unsure how to get around this.  Looking at other recent patches in patchwork I see that other patches use these macros without being flagged as errors. 

It is a false positive.
PRIx64 and PRIu64 are obviously allowed.
The only thing you need to take care is having spaces around.

> I thought perhaps that my version of checkpath.pl was newer because I just downloaded it so I ran it on one of the other patchwork patches to validate my results.   The results that I get are a bit confusing.  Running checkpatches.sh on this patch (http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19766/) reports no errors, warnings, or checks while this one (http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/20742/) flags two different kinds of errors related to the usage of PRIx64.  It complains about the camelcase aspect of it, and it also complains about the lack of space between the PRIx64 and the concatenated strings at either side.  
> 
> Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening?

Maybe the difference is because the first one happens in a standard
printf function and checkpatch would ignore the specifiers.