Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: fix false positive for REPEATED_WORD warning

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 23:25 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> Thanks for your feedback. I ran a manual check using this approach
> over v5.6..v5.8.
> The negatives occurring with this approach are for the word 'be'
> (Frequency 5) and 'add'(Frequency 1). For eg.
> 
> WARNING:REPEATED_WORD: Possible repeated word: 'be'
> #278: FILE: drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_flow.c:388:
> + * @seg: index of packet segment whose raw fields are to be be extracted
> 
> WARNING:REPEATED_WORD: Possible repeated word: 'add'
> #21:
> Let's also add add a note about using only the l3 access without l4
> 
> Apart from these, it works as expected. It also takes into account the
> cases for multiple occurrences of hex, as you mentioned. For eg.
> 
> WARNING:REPEATED_WORD: Possible repeated word: 'ffff'
> #15:
[]
> I'll try to combine both methods and come up with a better approach.

Enjoy, but please consider:

If for over 30K patches, there are just a few false positives and
a few false negatives, it likely doesn't need much improvement...

checkpatch works on patch contexts.

It's not intended to be perfect.

It's just a little tool that can help avoid some common defects.