From: Mitch Bradley <wmb-D5eQfiDGL7eakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Michal Marek <mmarek-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>,
Stephen Warren <swarren-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: dtc: import latest upstream dtc
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:52:40 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5075C3F8.4080600@firmworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5075C10C.1030205-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
On 10/10/2012 8:40 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 11:09 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On 10/09/2012 04:16 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 10/01/2012 12:39 PM, Jon Loeliger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> What more do you think needs discussion re: dtc+cpp?
>>>>
>>>> How not to abuse the ever-loving shit out of it? :-)
>>>
>>> Perhaps we can just handle this through the regular patch review
>>> process; I think it may be difficult to define and agree upon exactly
>>> what "abuse" means ahead of time, but it's probably going to be easy
>>> enough to recognize it when one sees it?
>>
>> Rather than repeating things over and over in reviews, we should
>> document at least rules we can easily agree on and then add to it when
>> people get "creative." Also, I can't keep up with every single binding
>> review as is, and this could just add another level of complexity to the
>> review. A few off the top of my head and from the thread discussion:
>>
>> - Headers must be self contained with no outside (i.e. libc, kernel,
>> etc.) header dependencies.
>> - No kernel kconfig option usage
>> - No gcc built-in define usage
>> - No unused items (i.e. externs, structs, etc.)
>
>> - No macro concatenation
>
> That seems to be potentially a very useful feature; I have no idea why
> we would ban that; it isn't banned in C code in the kernel is it?
It's used in the kernel. It is useful, but it has an unexpected side
effect that can be extremely annoying - it can make it extremely
difficult to find a definition with grep. All the grep hits will be for
the fully-expanded uses of a symbol, while the definition is "hidden" by
virtue of being synthesized by concatenation.
Maybe it's not a big deal in a small project, but in a code base the
size of the Linux kernel, where you don't know a priori where something
is defined, it can make you want to tear your hair out.
>
>> - No macros for strings or property names
>
> Property names I can understand. Property values - I can perhaps see a
> use-case for...
>
> _______________________________________________
> devicetree-discuss mailing list
> devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mitch Bradley <wmb@firmworks.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>,
devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: dtc: import latest upstream dtc
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:52:40 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5075C3F8.4080600@firmworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5075C10C.1030205@wwwdotorg.org>
On 10/10/2012 8:40 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 11:09 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On 10/09/2012 04:16 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 10/01/2012 12:39 PM, Jon Loeliger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> What more do you think needs discussion re: dtc+cpp?
>>>>
>>>> How not to abuse the ever-loving shit out of it? :-)
>>>
>>> Perhaps we can just handle this through the regular patch review
>>> process; I think it may be difficult to define and agree upon exactly
>>> what "abuse" means ahead of time, but it's probably going to be easy
>>> enough to recognize it when one sees it?
>>
>> Rather than repeating things over and over in reviews, we should
>> document at least rules we can easily agree on and then add to it when
>> people get "creative." Also, I can't keep up with every single binding
>> review as is, and this could just add another level of complexity to the
>> review. A few off the top of my head and from the thread discussion:
>>
>> - Headers must be self contained with no outside (i.e. libc, kernel,
>> etc.) header dependencies.
>> - No kernel kconfig option usage
>> - No gcc built-in define usage
>> - No unused items (i.e. externs, structs, etc.)
>
>> - No macro concatenation
>
> That seems to be potentially a very useful feature; I have no idea why
> we would ban that; it isn't banned in C code in the kernel is it?
It's used in the kernel. It is useful, but it has an unexpected side
effect that can be extremely annoying - it can make it extremely
difficult to find a definition with grep. All the grep hits will be for
the fully-expanded uses of a symbol, while the definition is "hidden" by
virtue of being synthesized by concatenation.
Maybe it's not a big deal in a small project, but in a code base the
size of the Linux kernel, where you don't know a priori where something
is defined, it can make you want to tear your hair out.
>
>> - No macros for strings or property names
>
> Property names I can understand. Property values - I can perhaps see a
> use-case for...
>
> _______________________________________________
> devicetree-discuss mailing list
> devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-10 18:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-28 21:25 [PATCH] dtc: import latest upstream dtc Stephen Warren
2012-09-29 21:06 ` Jon Loeliger
2012-10-01 16:09 ` Rob Herring
[not found] ` <5069C042.40209-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-01 16:13 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-01 16:13 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <5069C11C.6040505-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-01 17:56 ` Rob Herring
2012-10-01 17:56 ` Rob Herring
2012-10-01 18:33 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <5069E1F0.5070902-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-01 18:39 ` Jon Loeliger
2012-10-01 18:39 ` Jon Loeliger
[not found] ` <E1TIktZ-0000U4-Qh-CYoMK+44s/E@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-09 21:16 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-09 21:16 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <50749441.8030307-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-09 23:20 ` Mitch Bradley
2012-10-09 23:20 ` Mitch Bradley
2012-10-10 0:04 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-10 0:04 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-10 4:43 ` Warner Losh
2012-10-10 7:24 ` David Gibson
[not found] ` <20121010072401.GA28467-W9XWwYn+TF0XU02nzanrWNbf9cGiqdzd@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-10 14:41 ` Warner Losh
2012-10-10 14:41 ` Warner Losh
2012-10-10 23:06 ` David Gibson
2012-10-10 15:16 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 15:33 ` Rob Herring
2012-10-10 16:19 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 17:18 ` Rob Herring
2012-10-10 18:42 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <5075954B.8030008-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-10 23:16 ` David Gibson
2012-10-10 23:16 ` David Gibson
2012-10-11 1:42 ` Mitch Bradley
[not found] ` <50762409.5060105-D5eQfiDGL7eakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-11 5:11 ` David Gibson
2012-10-11 5:11 ` David Gibson
[not found] ` <50759152.9050407-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-10 23:09 ` David Gibson
2012-10-10 23:09 ` David Gibson
2012-10-10 15:15 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 15:15 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 16:09 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-10 16:09 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-10 16:22 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 23:18 ` David Gibson
2012-10-12 17:24 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <5078525B.9030008-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-13 6:24 ` David Gibson
2012-10-13 6:24 ` David Gibson
[not found] ` <20121013062453.GH4640-W9XWwYn+TF0XU02nzanrWNbf9cGiqdzd@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-13 13:42 ` Segher Boessenkool
2012-10-13 13:42 ` Segher Boessenkool
[not found] ` <3C5DD611-6F36-4D13-9A88-377A8E30AAA5-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-14 0:16 ` David Gibson
2012-10-14 0:16 ` David Gibson
2012-10-10 17:09 ` Rob Herring
[not found] ` <5075ABB8.103-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-10 18:23 ` Mitch Bradley
2012-10-10 18:23 ` Mitch Bradley
[not found] ` <5075BD21.2070106-D5eQfiDGL7eakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-10 18:45 ` Stephen Warren
2012-10-10 18:45 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <5075C254.4040304-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-10 18:56 ` Mitch Bradley
2012-10-10 18:56 ` Mitch Bradley
2012-10-11 0:14 ` David Gibson
2012-10-10 23:54 ` David Gibson
2012-10-10 18:40 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <5075C10C.1030205-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-10-10 18:52 ` Mitch Bradley [this message]
2012-10-10 18:52 ` Mitch Bradley
2012-10-01 18:02 ` Jon Loeliger
2012-10-01 18:02 ` Jon Loeliger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5075C3F8.4080600@firmworks.com \
--to=wmb-d5eqfidgl7eakbo8gow8eq@public.gmane.org \
--cc=devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mmarek-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org \
--cc=swarren-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.