On Mon, 17 Aug 2015, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Finn Thain 
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

BTW, checkpatch reported a few newly-introduced whitespace errors in 
patches 03, 05, 16, 24, and 25.

I will check again, but I'm sure those are all deliberate. I examined 
all the "errors" and "warnings" before submitting.

checkpatch doesn't really understand the difference between whitespace 
used for indentation of statements (according to scope) and whitespace 
used for alignment of terms or parameters (when line-wrapped). Any 
tool that fails to make that distinction can't be depended upon to 
correctly validate the elisp in Documentation/CodingStyle, for 
example.

Checkpatch complains because you don't replace a sequence of 8 spaces by 
a TAB in continuation lines.

Right. Were such a sequence used for indentation, a tab should be used 
instead. After those tabs, spaces are needed for alignment (see elisp 
example mentioned above).

But I sure wouldn't want to try to encode that distinction in regexp (as 
opposed to comparing a patch with its pretty-printed version, as might be 
generated by an actual C parser). So I expect some false positives from 
checkpatch.

-- 

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert