From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753777Ab3CRPmV (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:42:21 -0400 Received: from cpsmtpb-ews04.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.39.7]:64189 "EHLO cpsmtpb-ews04.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752808Ab3CRPmU (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:42:20 -0400 Message-ID: <1363621331.1335.176.camel@x61.thuisdomein> Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: stop checking for CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL From: Paul Bolle To: Kees Cook Cc: Andy Whitcroft , Joe Perches , Greg Kroah-Hartman , LKML Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 16:42:11 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1363469435.1335.137.camel@x61.thuisdomein> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4 (3.4.4-2.fc17) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Mar 2013 15:42:11.0671 (UTC) FILETIME=[28116E70:01CE23EF] X-RcptDomain: vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 15:38 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > Hrm, I actually think it would be better to change this to ERROR > instead of WARN. I figured the main reason to add this warning was to prevent people to add dependencies on EXPERIMENTAL while you were cleaning the tree, which could mean you had to redo patches each time that happened. Anyhow, with EXPERIMENTAL gone, this is just one of the mistakes people can make in using the kconfig system. I'm not sure that we should use checkpatch to catch these. For this particular case it must also be noted that if code gets in while still depending on EXPERIMENTAL someone also missed that this code doesn't get build at all. Paul Bolle