From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mk: use misleading indentation warning when
 available
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 10:05:59 +0000
Message-ID: <6d7f1461-3f8c-e912-3223-f37dc3d209e0@intel.com>
References: <f9e0369f-5f63-caec-8964-c172586c3a6f@intel.com>
 <20181218102643.4332-1-gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
 <da5f04df-89fc-728d-8b87-7f931724e74e@intel.com>
 <20181219092409.yrxltegt7e76zevy@bidouze.vm.6wind.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ga=c3=abtan_Rivet?= <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>,
 Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80B341B48D
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 11:06:02 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20181219092409.yrxltegt7e76zevy@bidouze.vm.6wind.com>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 19-Dec-18 9:24 AM, Gaëtan Rivet wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 02:50:30PM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 12/18/2018 10:26 AM, Gaetan Rivet wrote:
>>> -Wmisleading-indentation was introduced in GCC 6.0.
>>
>> It seems '-Wmisleading-indentation' is part of -Wall, which we already set by
>> default. If so no need to explicitly add it.
>>
>> The link I found:
>> https://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/gcc-6/porting_to.html
>>
>> copy-paste:
>> "
>> A new warning -Wmisleading-indentation was added to -Wall, warning about places
>> where the indentation of the code might mislead a human reader about the control
>> flow:
>> "
>>
>> Is there a way to confirm it is part of -Wall?
>>
> 
> I think you are right, actually the check was already used.
> This is worrying, given that the original bug was not seen.
> 
> This patch can be left out then, but the problem remains. Maybe an
> update to coding style is needed, or an evolution to checkpatch //
> preferably something else.

clang-format? It's not exactly a style *checker*, but if we had a 
.clang-format config file included with DPDK, it would be easy to 1) 
format the code properly before sending out the patches, and 2) convert 
the entire DPDK codebase to the new style, should such need arise.

(also, uncrustify and other code beautifiers...)

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly