Re: [PULL 5/8] gitlab: work harder to avoid false positives in checkpatch

[Alex Bennée]

Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 03:33:00PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> This copies the behaviour of patchew's configuration to make the diff
>> algorithm generate a minimal diff.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Wainer dos Santos Moschetta <wainersm@redhat.com>
>> Message-Id: <20210602153247.27651-1-alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>> 
>> diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.d/static_checks.yml b/.gitlab-ci.d/static_checks.yml
>> index 8e30872164..7e685c6a65 100644
>> --- a/.gitlab-ci.d/static_checks.yml
>> +++ b/.gitlab-ci.d/static_checks.yml
>> @@ -3,7 +3,11 @@ check-patch:
>>    image: $CI_REGISTRY_IMAGE/qemu/centos8:latest
>>    needs:
>>      job: amd64-centos8-container
>> -  script: .gitlab-ci.d/check-patch.py
>> +  script:
>> +    - git config --local diff.renamelimit 0
>> +    - git config --local diff.renames True
>> +    - git config --local diff.algorithm histogram
>> +    - .gitlab-ci.d/check-patch.py
>
> No objection to merging this patch as is, but I wonder if we ought to
> make scripts/checkpatch.pl set these options explicitly when it runs
> git, eg
>
>    git -c diff.renamelimit=0 -c diff.renames=True ...etc show
>
> so that everyone who runs checkpatch.pl benefits from the improvement.

Sure - I've generally held off messing with checkpatch directly because
of the general desire to keep it in-sync with upstream. Maybe that's
becoming less of a concern as time goes on?

[AJB says that with a totally straight face despite another patch in
this PR doing exactly that...]

>
> Regards,
> Daniel


-- 
Alex Bennée