Re: report: scripts: checkpatch: Spell Checker Does Not Run with '-f'

[Federico Vaga]

On Thursday, February 14, 2019 3:44:55 PM CET Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-02-14 at 13:48 +0100, Federico Vaga wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Recently I have produce a couple of patches but I get different warnings
> > if I run checkpatch on the file (-f) or if I run it of a patch file. In
> > particular, the problem I found is with the spell checker which seems to
> > run only when the option '-f' is not used. I am wandering if there are
> > other similar cases.
> > 
> > I do not know Perl, so I cannot investigate more, but I have a practical
> > example. I have this simple patch applied on my tree that introduces a
> > spell
> > error:
> If you want spelling fixes on files you have to use --strict

Thanks

Is it a design choice to have different checks enabled with '-f'? 
 
> > From: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@xxxxxxx>
> > Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 13:29:39 +0100
> > Subject: [PATCH] script: checkpatch: buggy(?) output with -f option
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > 
> >  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c
> > b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c index b32d67c..f4deb90 100644
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ocores.c
> > @@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ static int ocores_poll_wait(struct ocores_i2c *i2c)
> > 
> >  		/* on going transfer */
> >  		mask = OCI2C_STAT_TIP;
> >  		/*
> > 
> > -		 * We wait for the data to be transferred (8bit),
> > +		 * We wait for the data to be transfered (8bit),
> > 
> >  		 * then we start polling on the ACK/NACK bit
> >  		 */
> >  		
> >  		udelay((8 * 1000) / i2c->bus_clock_khz);