[Linux-kernel-mentees] Regarding "Linux Kernel: Evaluate and Improve checkpatch.pl"

Lukas Bulwahn lukas.bulwahn at gmail.com
Sat Aug 22 08:06:49 UTC 2020



On Fri, 21 Aug 2020, Ayush wrote:

> August 17, 2020 3:13 PM, "Lukas Bulwahn" <lukas.bulwahn at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Dear Ayush,
> > 
> > The zeroth task is to learn suitable netiquette for the communication with 
> > the kernel community.
> > 
> > First, please do not top-post.
> > 
> > A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
> > Q: Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
> > 
> > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> > 
> > A: The lost context.
> > Q: What makes top-posted replies harder to read than bottom-posted?
> > 
> > A: Yes.
> > Q: Should I trim down the quoted part of an email to which I'm 
> > replying?
> > 
> > Second, please always CC: linux-kernel-mentees at lists.linuxfoundation.org.
> > 
> > Third, set up your email client according to the kernel community rules.
> > 
> > Then, the first task is to run checkpatch.pl on a few kernel patches and
> > collect the results. When you have that, please share your script with
> > me, e.g., in a github repository.
> > 
> > Hints to the first task:
> > 
> > Can you create a list of all non-merge commits that were added in the
> > version v5.8 of the kernel, i.e., all non-merge commits that are in v5.8
> > and not already in v5.7?
> > 
> > Can you share the script/command you executed and the resulting list on 
> > github?
> > 
> > Can you run your script on all commits of this list above and record
> > all checkpatch.pl reports, and store them in your github repository?
> > 
> > Can you suggest ideas how to aggregate the findings and create a
> > statistics? For example: Which type of error is reported most?
> > Can you implement that idea?
> > 
> > I also suggest to have a look at
> > the options ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --list-types and
> > ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --show-types. The option --show-types changes
> > the output of checkpatch.pl to list type identifiers, so it is easier
> > to parse and aggregate the output.
> > 
> > Please also share the script you create for that purpose on your
> > github repository.
> > 
> > The second task is to pick one warning that appears often and improve
> > checkpatch.pl to handle that better and get it accepted by the kernel
> > community.
> > 
> > Hints to the second task follow when the first task is solved.
> > 
> > If you fail on any of those tasks, you are out of the selection process.
> > 
> > Lukas
> 
> Sir,
> 
> I have attempted the task 1 and pushed the same to GitHub.
> 
> Please have a look and suggest improvements.
> 
> https://github.com/eldraco19/evalute_improve_checkpatch_pl
> 
> Please let me know if there are any issues with this.
>

So far, so good.

Here are the questions we want to answer:

- So what are the 20 categories that occur most?

You are getting close to that answer, but you are not there yet.

Then look at the findings. For those 20 categories, are there specific 
findings that are multiple times false positives?

So, the script complains about something, but it does not get that the 
patch author wrote something completely unrelated to the error message.

Lukas



More information about the Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list