From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gyZSg-00059B-W8 for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:55:46 +0000 References: <20190219141647.2537-1-a.fatoum@pengutronix.de> <20190219141647.2537-3-a.fatoum@pengutronix.de> <20190220101412.5032124aaf26a799c903ec9f@gmail.com> From: Ahmad Fatoum Message-ID: <7475eecb-5e8e-a827-f04e-b3d8d749edaf@pengutronix.de> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 10:55:40 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190220101412.5032124aaf26a799c903ec9f@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] scripts/checkpatch.pl: rebase on top of upstream v5.0-rc6 To: Antony Pavlov , Sascha Hauer Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org Hello Antony, On 20/2/19 08:14, Antony Pavlov wrote: > On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:16:47 +0100 > Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > >> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl >> index 4e17347a8481..48b39fbf962a 100755 >> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl >> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > ... > >> @@ -1555,13 +2997,9 @@ sub process { >> >> my @compats = $rawline =~ /\"([a-zA-Z0-9\-\,\.\+_]+)\"/g; >> >> - # linux device tree files >> - my $dt_path = $root . "/dts/Bindings/"; >> + my $dt_path = $root . "/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/"; > > At the moment it looks like barebox uses both paths ("/dts/Bindings/" and "/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/") > to store dt-related documentation. Missed this one. I can reinstate it in a v2. I think I should've caught all barebox specifics now. > > The patch is very long and very hard to review. Any suggestion on a better way to do it? It's a straight copy from upstream with some barebox specific changes applied on top, so I assume ensuring the barebox changes are accounted for are all the review we need. I could for v2 include a scripts/checkpatch.patch which patches the corresponding upstream checkpatch.pl into the barebox checkpatch.pl. That way reviewing would work like this: - review checkpatch.patch - $ patch -R < checkpatch.patch - $ diff $LINUX/scripts/checkpatch.pl $BAREBOX/scripts/checkpatch.pl What do you think? > > @Sascha > > Can we introduce rules on storing dt-documentation? > > It looks like we have some dt documentation duplication, e.g. > > ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/dallas,ds1307.rst > ./dts/Bindings/rtc/rtc-ds1307.txt > -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox