From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36234)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1RvVxl-0006q9-BV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:31:14 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1RvVxb-0000fT-9K
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:31:09 -0500
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:32838 helo=mx2.suse.de)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1RvVxb-0000fO-2d
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:30:59 -0500
Message-ID: <4F33E6B1.4090901@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:30:57 +0100
From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [BUG] checkpatch: ERROR due to * recognized as operator
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, qemu-devel Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>

Hello Blue,

I recently stumbled over the following checkpatch.pl false positive:

--8<--

--- a/hw/his.c
+++ b/hw/his.c
@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
-    cpu_reset(CPUState *env);
+    cpu_state_reset(CPUState *env);

--- a/hw/hers.c
+++ b/hw/hers.c
@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
-    cpu_reset(CPUX86State *env);
+    cpu_state_reset(CPUX86State *env);

--- a/hw/its.c
+++ b/hw/its.c
@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
-cpu_reset(CPUState *env);
+cpu_state_reset(CPUState *env);

--- a/hw/theirs.c
+++ b/hw/theirs.c
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
 typedef struct CPUState CPUState;
-cpu_reset(CPUState *env);
+cpu_state_reset(CPUState *env);

--8<--

results in:


ERROR: need consistent spacing around '*' (ctx:WxV)
#5: FILE: hw/his.c:1:
+    cpu_state_reset(CPUState *env);
                              ^

ERROR: need consistent spacing around '*' (ctx:WxV)
#11: FILE: hw/hers.c:1:
+    cpu_state_reset(CPUX86State *env);
                                 ^

ERROR: need consistent spacing around '*' (ctx:WxV)
#17: FILE: hw/its.c:1:
+cpu_state_reset(CPUState *env);
                          ^

ERROR: need consistent spacing around '*' (ctx:WxV)
#24: FILE: hw/theirs.c:2:
+cpu_state_reset(CPUState *env);
                          ^

total: 4 errors, 0 warnings, 9 lines checked


So, it seems to interpret the * symbol as multiplication rather than
pointer.

Surprisingly, in my real code, using CPUState in place of CPUX86State
was actually able to remedy the ERROR but not in this simplified test
case. I added some prints around that place and it seems, in the working
CPUState case it didn't even enter the op checking code path.

Any ideas?

Regards,
Andreas

--=20
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=F6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=FCrnbe=
rg