From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44792) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UftuF-0008N6-Jx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 11:27:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uftu9-0007gk-Oj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 11:27:47 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:13715) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uftu9-0007gZ-HB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 11:27:41 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 17:25:21 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Tomoki Sekiyama's message of "Fri, 24 May 2013 14:20:31 +0000") Message-ID: <87ehcwmmce.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v3 02/11] Fix errors and warnings while compiling with c++ compilier List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Tomoki Sekiyama Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Stefan Hajnoczi , "mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "lcapitulino@redhat.com" , "vrozenfe@redhat.com" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , Seiji Aguchi , "areis@redhat.com" Tomoki Sekiyama writes: > On 5/24/13 4:52 , "Stefan Hajnoczi" wrote: > >>On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 06:34:43PM +0000, Tomoki Sekiyama wrote: >>> On 5/23/13 8:12 , "Stefan Hajnoczi" wrote: >>> >>> >On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:33:41AM -0400, Tomoki Sekiyama wrote: >>> >> Add C++ keywords to avoid errors in compiling with c++ compiler. >>> >> This also renames class member of PciDeviceInfo to q_class. >>> >> >>> >> Signed-off-by: Tomoki Sekiyama >>> >> --- >>> >> hmp.c | 2 +- >>> >> hw/pci/pci.c | 2 +- >>> >> scripts/qapi.py | 9 ++++++++- >>> >> 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> > >>> >Please also extend scripts/checkpatch.pl. Otherwise it is very likely >>> >that C++ keywords will be introduced again in the future. Most people >>> >will not build the VSS code and therefore checkpatch.pl needs to ensure >>> >that patches with C++ keywords will not be accepted. >>> > >>> >Stefan >>> >>> I think it would be difficult to identify problematic C++ keywords usage >>> from patches because headers can legally contain C++ keywords and >>> checkpatch.pl doesn't know where it should be used. >>> Do you have any good ideas? >> >>We can ignore false warnings for 0.1% of patches (the ones that touch >>VSS C++ code). But for the remaining 99.9% of patches it's worth >>guarding against VSS bitrot. >> >>Remember not many people will compile it and therefore they won't notice >>when they break it. I really think it's worth putting some effort in >>now so VSS doesn't periodically break. >> >>checkpatch.pl is a hacky sort of C parser. It already checks for a >>bunch of similar things and it knows about comments, macros, and >>strings. It does not perform #include expansion, so there is no risk of >>including system headers that have C++ code. >> >>Stefan > > Thanks for your comment. > > I'm still wondering because it actually causes a lot false positives > (not just 0.1%...) even for the patches not touching VSS. > > For example, keyword 'class' is used in qdev-monitor.c, qom/object.c, > and a lot of files in hw/*/*.c and include/{hw,qom}/*.h, but > they have nothing to do with qemu-ga. Qemu-ga is just a part of whole > qemu source code, so I don't want to warn around the other parts. And I appreciate that. Purging some other language's keywords feels like pointless churn to me.