Re: [Qemu-devel] Headers without multiple inclusion guards

[Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>]

Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> writes:

> On 5/28/19 8:12 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> We have a bunch of headers without multiple inclusion guards.  Some are
>> clearly intentional, some look accidental.  Too many for me to find out
>> by examining each of them, so I'm asking their maintainers.
>> 
>> Why do I ask?  I'd like to mark the intentional ones and fix the
>> accidental ones, so they don't flunk "make check-headers" from "[RFC v4
>> 0/7] Baby steps towards saner headers" just because they lack multiple
>> inclusion guards.
>> 
>> Just in case: what's a multiple inclusion guard?  It's
>> 
>>     #ifndef UNIQUE_GUARD_SYMBOL_H
>>     #define UNIQUE_GUARD_SYMBOL_H
>>     ...
>>     #endif
>> 
>> with nothing but comments outside the conditional, so that the header
>> can safely be included more than once.
>> 
>> I append the alphabetical list of headers without multiple inclusion
>> guards (as reported by scripts/clean-header-guards -nv), followed by the
>> same list sorted into maintainer buckets.  If you're cc'ed, please find
>> your bucket(s), and tell me which headers intentionally lack guards.
>> 
> [...]
>> 
>> EDK2 Firmware
>> M: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
>> M: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
>> tests/uefi-test-tools/UefiTestToolsPkg/Include/Guid/BiosTablesTest.h
>
> This file has a guard in non-standard formats:
>
> #ifndef __BIOS_TABLES_TEST_H__
> #define __BIOS_TABLES_TEST_H__
> ...

scripts/clean-header-guards.pl didn't recognize the guard due to the //
comment after the #endif.  I fixed the script, then used it to clean up
this header.

Thanks!