[coreboot] WG: What is the best way to treat warnings reported by checkpatch.pl

[Zeh, Werner]

>Does git commit --no-verify (or -n for short) allow you to commit?
>

Yes, one can go this way and I did it already earlier. But I just wanted to point it out here.
We do not need a check script for every commit if we simply disable the check when it comes to issues.
I wanted to start this discussion to improve the situation with this script we currently have.

>I think we should try to do a little of option 1 within reason, not by forking the script but rather by disabling more check steps that don't match the coreboot code style (by >having our wrapper pass --ignore XXX flags to checkpatch) and possibly upstreaming checkpatch.pl patches with new features we need to the Linux kernel (to make the >detection more accurate or add a more specific --ignore flag we can turn on). In the Chromium fork of coreboot we're already using a bunch of those flags that we should >probably use in upstream coreboot as well:
>
>--ignore C99_COMMENTS
>--ignore GLOBAL_INITIALISERS
>--ignore INITIALISED_STATIC
>--ignore LINE_SPACING
>--ignore NEW_TYPEDEFS
>--ignore PREFER_ALIGNED
>--ignore PREFER_PACKED
>--ignore PREFER_PRINTF
>--ignore SPLIT_STRING
>

If we really did not touch the contents of the script, I totally agree with you. We can disable warnings that do not match our coding style while updating the script from its origin from time to time. If we have already started tailoring this script, than we should do it the right way and end this tailoring process to match our needs. I admit that the later one will end up in more work if one wants to synchronize this script with origin again one day.

Werner