From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3CD8E81 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:34:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Nov 2015 02:34:00 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,234,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="824797537" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.208.61]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 02 Nov 2015 02:33:57 -0800 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 02 Nov 2015 10:33:56 +0025 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 10:33:56 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: "Van Haaren, Harry" Message-ID: <20151102103355.GA5688@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1445615606-3885-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <2182686.Rj6sEZi19Z@xps13> <20151030161640.GA5284@bricha3-MOBL3> <2771291.DI3Lyk6PGI@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] scripts: add checkpatch wrapper X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 10:34:06 -0000 On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 10:28:35AM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] scripts: add checkpatch wrapper > > > > 2015-10-30 16:16, Bruce Richardson: > > > Another request, can you perhaps also fix the script for situations where > > > checkpatch.pl is not in the kernel tree. > > > > > > OK > > I prefer using it in the Linux tree because it is updated with "git pull". > > I would like to suggest including the checkpatch.pl script itself in the dpdk tree, as this would ensure that we are all running the exact same version of checkpatch. > > My previous patchset had errors that I had not detected because I ran an older checkpatch.pl, and I think there are others who have similar issues that the checkpatch version provides more/less errors. > > If included in the repo, we would all automatically upgrade when the next checkpatch.pl is merged - providing consistency. > > -Harry +1 /Bruce