From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 865DA2EB10 for ; Mon, 12 May 2025 00:55:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747011347; cv=none; b=ZwB8uw8rEr3YJpsxamHVkVkrmsOaOwKxs9Qzw42zTGPjb6rRziKJS3MpFf5H1A5X6g8mnVK5CKUZVKMlhYEwn4DmyPMXzsDw1qGimTpR2gMN0QMXwBvS8l76IS1CQB56M/2QS1/bgpg5HKKXXt2zgsvghHNZUW67VF7o1v0Eeyk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747011347; c=relaxed/simple; bh=yVgipgPNCAvfyYJiaj6Ywv3aZ1TVq6kpmCCQEqjmN0M=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-Id; b=MpiIu9uyBAihK7dFCcy6rcS76B2LlbLCG+D7rWGA8CFiijT0h5r7XFY/Fufxfn7jeOhHrU1F8CRFWXlAd+xbK3XZCAlOT7LtiX7ENkIV8C0hZqLFcaDi3fFm41y1JBemNlTebDzs7uhj7972hNOAAfgw9g0sRry07uZHTVKN5uQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b=124gpLqa; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b="124gpLqa" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E96F3C4CEE4; Mon, 12 May 2025 00:55:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1747011347; bh=yVgipgPNCAvfyYJiaj6Ywv3aZ1TVq6kpmCCQEqjmN0M=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:From; b=124gpLqafjaWGo6L1ZRSyNgZ2e4q5u9oXGwqnwddcPo3VFyMA5pOHL2MGJb5vae2Q vdHbbEoZfrx4tv4cQilF4NZOhuE1hKKupCp0tjsi28yW00WlRCLp2tE2y+QHG5D5Rm jx4/IuZM2yUQOW/6g1Bnpz/+Iil0ikPZZ0hdAvcs= Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 17:55:46 -0700 To: mm-commits@vger.kernel.org,viresh.kumar@linaro.org,lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com,louis.chauvet@bootlin.com,joe@perches.com,dwaipayanray1@gmail.com,apw@canonical.com,jim.cromie@gmail.com,akpm@linux-foundation.org From: Andrew Morton Subject: [merged mm-nonmm-stable] checkpatch-qualify-do-while-0-advice.patch removed from -mm tree Message-Id: <20250512005546.E96F3C4CEE4@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: mm-commits@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: The quilt patch titled Subject: checkpatch: qualify do-while-0 advice has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was checkpatch-qualify-do-while-0-advice.patch This patch was dropped because it was merged into the mm-nonmm-stable branch of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm ------------------------------------------------------ From: Jim Cromie Subject: checkpatch: qualify do-while-0 advice Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 17:51:55 -0600 Add a paragraph of advice qualifying the general do-while-0 advice, noting 3 possible misguidings. reduce one ERROR to WARN, for the case I actually encountered. And add 'static_assert' to named exceptions, along with some additional comments about named exceptions vs (detection of) declarative construction primitives (union, struct, [], etc). Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250325235156.663269-3-jim.cromie@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Jim Cromie Cc: Andy Whitcroft Cc: Joe Perches Cc: Dwaipayan Ray Cc: Lukas Bulwahn Cc: Louis Chauvet Cc: Viresh Kumar Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton --- scripts/checkpatch.pl | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl~checkpatch-qualify-do-while-0-advice +++ a/scripts/checkpatch.pl @@ -151,6 +151,24 @@ EOM exit($exitcode); } +my $DO_WHILE_0_ADVICE = q{ + do {} while (0) advice is over-stated in a few situations: + + The more obvious case is macros, like MODULE_PARM_DESC, invoked at + file-scope, where C disallows code (it must be in functions). See + $exceptions if you have one to add by name. + + More troublesome is declarative macros used at top of new scope, + like DECLARE_PER_CPU. These might just compile with a do-while-0 + wrapper, but would be incorrect. Most of these are handled by + detecting struct,union,etc declaration primitives in $exceptions. + + Theres also macros called inside an if (block), which "return" an + expression. These cannot do-while, and need a ({}) wrapper. + + Enjoy this qualification while we work to improve our heuristics. +}; + sub uniq { my %seen; return grep { !$seen{$_}++ } @_; @@ -5883,9 +5901,9 @@ sub process { } } -# multi-statement macros should be enclosed in a do while loop, grab the -# first statement and ensure its the whole macro if its not enclosed -# in a known good container +# Usually multi-statement macros should be enclosed in a do {} while +# (0) loop. Grab the first statement and ensure its the whole macro +# if its not enclosed in a known good container if ($realfile !~ m@/vmlinux.lds.h$@ && $line =~ /^.\s*\#\s*define\s*$Ident(\()?/) { my $ln = $linenr; @@ -5938,10 +5956,13 @@ sub process { my $exceptions = qr{ $Declare| + # named exceptions module_param_named| MODULE_PARM_DESC| DECLARE_PER_CPU| DEFINE_PER_CPU| + static_assert| + # declaration primitives __typeof__\(| union| struct| @@ -5976,11 +5997,11 @@ sub process { ERROR("MULTISTATEMENT_MACRO_USE_DO_WHILE", "Macros starting with if should be enclosed by a do - while loop to avoid possible if/else logic defects\n" . "$herectx"); } elsif ($dstat =~ /;/) { - ERROR("MULTISTATEMENT_MACRO_USE_DO_WHILE", - "Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while loop\n" . "$herectx"); + WARN("MULTISTATEMENT_MACRO_USE_DO_WHILE", + "Non-declarative macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while loop\n" . "$herectx\nBUT SEE:\n$DO_WHILE_0_ADVICE"); } else { ERROR("COMPLEX_MACRO", - "Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses\n" . "$herectx"); + "Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses\n" . "$herectx\nBUT SEE:\n$DO_WHILE_0_ADVICE"); } } _ Patches currently in -mm which might be from jim.cromie@gmail.com are