checkpatch.pl misses list_for_each_entry() coding style issues

checkpatch.pl misses list_for_each_entry() coding style issues

[Greg KH]

Hi Joe,

The following function:

$ cat foo.c 

static int foo_init(void)
{

	list_for_each_entry(foo, &foo, list)
	{
		do_something_foo(foo);
	}

	return 0;
}

Will not be caught by checkpatch:

$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --file foo.c 
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 11 lines checked

foo.c has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.


Any way to fix that up?

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: checkpatch.pl misses list_for_each_entry() coding style issues

[Joe Perches]

On Sat, 2014-07-12 at 16:08 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> static int foo_init(void)
> {
> 
> 	list_for_each_entry(foo, &foo, list)
> 	{
> 		do_something_foo(foo);
> 	}
> 
> 	return 0;
> }
> 
> Will not be caught by checkpatch:
> 
> $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --file foo.c 
> total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 11 lines checked
> 
> foo.c has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
> 
> 
> Any way to fix that up?

Probably.  Right now it only works on for/do tests.
It should probably also work on all functions.

I'll play with it.

[PATCH] checkpatch: Add for_each tests to indentation and brace tests

[Joe Perches]

All the various for_each loop macros were not tested for
trailing brace on the following lines and for bad indentation.

Add them.

Reported-by: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
---
On Sat, 2014-07-12 at 16:08 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> The following function:
> 
> $ cat foo.c 
> 
> static int foo_init(void)
> {
> 
> 	list_for_each_entry(foo, &foo, list)
> 	{
> 		do_something_foo(foo);
> 	}
> 
> 	return 0;
> }
> 
> Will not be caught by checkpatch:
> 
> $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --file foo.c 
> total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 11 lines checked
> 
> foo.c has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.

 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index d5ac001..5efbf50 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -2698,7 +2698,7 @@ sub process {
 
 # if/while/etc brace do not go on next line, unless defining a do while loop,
 # or if that brace on the next line is for something else
-		if ($line =~ /(.*)\b((?:if|while|for|switch)\s*\(|do\b|else\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*\#/) {
+		if ($line =~ /(.*)\b((?:if|while|for|switch|(?:[a-z_]+|)for_each[a-z_]+)\s*\(|do\b|else\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*\#/) {
 			my $pre_ctx = "$1$2";
 
 			my ($level, @ctx) = ctx_statement_level($linenr, $realcnt, 0);
@@ -2744,7 +2744,7 @@ sub process {
 		}
 
 # Check relative indent for conditionals and blocks.
-		if ($line =~ /\b(?:(?:if|while|for)\s*\(|do\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*#/ && $line !~ /\}\s*while\s*/) {
+		if ($line =~ /\b(?:(?:if|while|for|(?:[a-z_]+|)for_each[a-z_]+)\s*\(|do\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*#/ && $line !~ /\}\s*while\s*/) {
 			($stat, $cond, $line_nr_next, $remain_next, $off_next) =
 				ctx_statement_block($linenr, $realcnt, 0)
 					if (!defined $stat);

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add for_each tests to indentation and brace tests

[Andy Whitcroft]

On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 10:33:54PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> All the various for_each loop macros were not tested for
> trailing brace on the following lines and for bad indentation.
> 
> Add them.
> 
> Reported-by: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> ---
> On Sat, 2014-07-12 at 16:08 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > The following function:
> > 
> > $ cat foo.c 
> > 
> > static int foo_init(void)
> > {
> > 
> > 	list_for_each_entry(foo, &foo, list)
> > 	{
> > 		do_something_foo(foo);
> > 	}
> > 
> > 	return 0;
> > }
> > 
> > Will not be caught by checkpatch:
> > 
> > $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --file foo.c 
> > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 11 lines checked
> > 
> > foo.c has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
> 
>  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index d5ac001..5efbf50 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -2698,7 +2698,7 @@ sub process {
>  
>  # if/while/etc brace do not go on next line, unless defining a do while loop,
>  # or if that brace on the next line is for something else
> -		if ($line =~ /(.*)\b((?:if|while|for|switch)\s*\(|do\b|else\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*\#/) {
> +		if ($line =~ /(.*)\b((?:if|while|for|switch|(?:[a-z_]+|)for_each[a-z_]+)\s*\(|do\b|else\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*\#/) {

They way you end this first addition with |) converts it the (?:[a-z_]*)
doesn't it?  Were you intending to do (?:[a-z_]+_|) ?

>  			my $pre_ctx = "$1$2";
>  
>  			my ($level, @ctx) = ctx_statement_level($linenr, $realcnt, 0);
> @@ -2744,7 +2744,7 @@ sub process {
>  		}
>  
>  # Check relative indent for conditionals and blocks.
> -		if ($line =~ /\b(?:(?:if|while|for)\s*\(|do\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*#/ && $line !~ /\}\s*while\s*/) {
> +		if ($line =~ /\b(?:(?:if|while|for|(?:[a-z_]+|)for_each[a-z_]+)\s*\(|do\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*#/ && $line !~ /\}\s*while\s*/) {
>  			($stat, $cond, $line_nr_next, $remain_next, $off_next) =
>  				ctx_statement_block($linenr, $realcnt, 0)
>  					if (!defined $stat);

With the above clarified it all seems sensible.

Acked-by: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>

-apw

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add for_each tests to indentation and brace tests

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2014-07-14 at 09:13 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 10:33:54PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > All the various for_each loop macros were not tested for
> > trailing brace on the following lines and for bad indentation.
> > 
> > Add them.
[]
> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
[]
> > @@ -2698,7 +2698,7 @@ sub process {
> >  
> >  # if/while/etc brace do not go on next line, unless defining a do while loop,
> >  # or if that brace on the next line is for something else
> > -		if ($line =~ /(.*)\b((?:if|while|for|switch)\s*\(|do\b|else\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*\#/) {
> > +		if ($line =~ /(.*)\b((?:if|while|for|switch|(?:[a-z_]+|)for_each[a-z_]+)\s*\(|do\b|else\b)/ && $line !~ /^.\s*\#/) {
> 
> They way you end this first addition with |) converts it the (?:[a-z_]*)
> doesn't it?  Were you intending to do (?:[a-z_]+_|) ?

I didn't think about it much.
It's the same thing no?