From: Wolfram Sang on
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0200, Fredrik Gustafsson wrote:

> since the number of long lines in the linux kernel is huge and since
> Greg Kroah Hartman in his google tech talk about the kernel
> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2SED6sewRw) talked about probably
> ignore that criteria in the future, I thought the checkpatch.pl script
> should have an option to ignore checking for long lines.
>
> This would help finding the real errors and warnings, because they don't
> drown in line length warnings.

Instead of adding another command-line option, I'd suggest to just use CHK
instead of WARN, so this check will be enabled with --strict. I wonder if there
is already consensus on deprecating the 80-char-rule?

Regards,

Wolfram

--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
From: Joe Perches on
On Sun, 2010-06-13 at 03:04 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0200, Fredrik Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > since the number of long lines in the linux kernel is huge and since
> > Greg Kroah Hartman in his google tech talk about the kernel
> > (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2SED6sewRw) talked about probably
> > ignore that criteria in the future, I thought the checkpatch.pl script
> > should have an option to ignore checking for long lines.
> >
> > This would help finding the real errors and warnings, because they don't
> > drown in line length warnings.
>
> Instead of adding another command-line option, I'd suggest to just use CHK
> instead of WARN, so this check will be enabled with --strict. I wonder if there
> is already consensus on deprecating the 80-char-rule?

Nope. There's a vocal contingent that doesn't like it though.
An earlier thread and suggested patch below.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/18/3


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Wolfram Sang on
> > Instead of adding another command-line option, I'd suggest to just use CHK
> > instead of WARN, so this check will be enabled with --strict. I wonder if there
> > is already consensus on deprecating the 80-char-rule?
>
> Nope. There's a vocal contingent that doesn't like it though.
> An earlier thread and suggested patch below.
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/18/3

Thought so. I like your approach, missed it back then. I'd vote for 132 chars
as the next limit, though.

Regards,

Wolfram

--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |