[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay

[Paolo Bonzini]

From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>

This assumes that the comment gives some justification;
"volatile sig_atomic_t" is also self-explanatory and usually
correct.

Discussed in:
'[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] dump-guest-memory.py: fix "You can't do that without a process to debug"'

Suggested-by: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20171215181810.4122-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
---
 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 34df753571..3dc27d9656 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -2475,8 +2475,11 @@ sub process {
 
 # no volatiles please
 		my $asm_volatile = qr{\b(__asm__|asm)\s+(__volatile__|volatile)\b};
-		if ($line =~ /\bvolatile\b/ && $line !~ /$asm_volatile/) {
-			ERROR("Use of volatile is usually wrong: see Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt\n" . $herecurr);
+		if ($line =~ /\bvolatile\b/ && $line !~ /$asm_volatile/ &&
+                    $line !~ /sig_atomic_t/ &&
+                    !ctx_has_comment($first_line, $linenr)) {
+			my $msg = "Use of volatile is usually wrong, please add a comment\n" . $herecurr;
+                        ERROR($msg);
 		}
 
 # warn about #if 0
-- 
2.14.3

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay

[Marc-André Lureau]

Hi

----- Original Message -----
> From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
> 
> This assumes that the comment gives some justification;
> "volatile sig_atomic_t" is also self-explanatory and usually
> correct.
> 
> Discussed in:
> '[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] dump-guest-memory.py: fix "You can't do that without a
> process to debug"'
> 
> Suggested-by: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
> Message-Id: <20171215181810.4122-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>

Thanks, I can add it to my 2 patches series for dump (to avoid error on Peter's end)

Unless you send a pull request with it sonnish


> ---
>  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 7 +++++--
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 34df753571..3dc27d9656 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -2475,8 +2475,11 @@ sub process {
>  
>  # no volatiles please
>  		my $asm_volatile = qr{\b(__asm__|asm)\s+(__volatile__|volatile)\b};
> -		if ($line =~ /\bvolatile\b/ && $line !~ /$asm_volatile/) {
> -			ERROR("Use of volatile is usually wrong: see
> Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt\n" . $herecurr);
> +		if ($line =~ /\bvolatile\b/ && $line !~ /$asm_volatile/ &&
> +                    $line !~ /sig_atomic_t/ &&
> +                    !ctx_has_comment($first_line, $linenr)) {
> +			my $msg = "Use of volatile is usually wrong, please add a comment\n" .
> $herecurr;
> +                        ERROR($msg);
>  		}
>  
>  # warn about #if 0
> --
> 2.14.3
> 
> 

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 18/12/2017 14:07, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> Hi
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
>>
>> This assumes that the comment gives some justification;
>> "volatile sig_atomic_t" is also self-explanatory and usually
>> correct.
>>
>> Discussed in:
>> '[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] dump-guest-memory.py: fix "You can't do that without a
>> process to debug"'
>>
>> Suggested-by: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
>> Message-Id: <20171215181810.4122-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> 
> Thanks, I can add it to my 2 patches series for dump (to avoid error on Peter's end)
> 
> Unless you send a pull request with it sonnish

It is not a big deal if it is included twice.  I'm planning my pull
request for tomorrow or Wednesday.

Paolo

> 
> 
>> ---
>>  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 7 +++++--
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> index 34df753571..3dc27d9656 100755
>> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>> @@ -2475,8 +2475,11 @@ sub process {
>>  
>>  # no volatiles please
>>  		my $asm_volatile = qr{\b(__asm__|asm)\s+(__volatile__|volatile)\b};
>> -		if ($line =~ /\bvolatile\b/ && $line !~ /$asm_volatile/) {
>> -			ERROR("Use of volatile is usually wrong: see
>> Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt\n" . $herecurr);
>> +		if ($line =~ /\bvolatile\b/ && $line !~ /$asm_volatile/ &&
>> +                    $line !~ /sig_atomic_t/ &&
>> +                    !ctx_has_comment($first_line, $linenr)) {
>> +			my $msg = "Use of volatile is usually wrong, please add a comment\n" .
>> $herecurr;
>> +                        ERROR($msg);
>>  		}
>>  
>>  # warn about #if 0
>> --
>> 2.14.3
>>
>>

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay

[no-reply]

Hi,

This series seems to have some coding style problems. See output below for
more information:

Type: series
Message-id: 20171218130309.2682-1-pbonzini@redhat.com
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay

=== TEST SCRIPT BEGIN ===
#!/bin/bash

BASE=base
n=1
total=$(git log --oneline $BASE.. | wc -l)
failed=0

git config --local diff.renamelimit 0
git config --local diff.renames True

commits="$(git log --format=%H --reverse $BASE..)"
for c in $commits; do
    echo "Checking PATCH $n/$total: $(git log -n 1 --format=%s $c)..."
    if ! git show $c --format=email | ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --mailback -; then
        failed=1
        echo
    fi
    n=$((n+1))
done

exit $failed
=== TEST SCRIPT END ===

Updating 3c8cf5a9c21ff8782164d1def7f44bd888713384
Switched to a new branch 'test'
ac1ea4c622 checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay

=== OUTPUT BEGIN ===
Checking PATCH 1/1: checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay...
ERROR: line over 90 characters
#35: FILE: scripts/checkpatch.pl:2481:
+			my $msg = "Use of volatile is usually wrong, please add a comment\n" . $herecurr;

total: 1 errors, 0 warnings, 13 lines checked

Your patch has style problems, please review.  If any of these errors
are false positives report them to the maintainer, see
CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.

=== OUTPUT END ===

Test command exited with code: 1


---
Email generated automatically by Patchew [http://patchew.org/].
Please send your feedback to patchew-devel@freelists.org