From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48909) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWZNS-0000mp-Tv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2018 22:06:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWZNP-0004GG-Np for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2018 22:06:02 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38372) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWZNP-0004Fi-Gm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2018 22:05:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 11:05:56 +0800 From: Fam Zheng Message-ID: <20180103030556.GA27755@localhost.localdomain> References: <1514940265-18093-1-git-send-email-mjc@sifive.com> <151494290795.165.10006581095663113372@5adcb62bf0d6> <20180103024112.GA25758@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 00/21] RISC-V QEMU Port Submission v1 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Michael Clark Cc: Bastian Koppelmann , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Sagar Karandikar On Wed, 01/03 15:54, Michael Clark wrote: > On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Fam Zheng wrote: > > > On Wed, 01/03 15:00, Michael Clark wrote: > > > So it's essentially one error, the single line case pattern for > > > table-driven decode which flags for long lines and asks to separate break > > > onto its own line. > > > > > > We have actually reduced the readability of other parts of the code to > > > conform to this specific rule. In fact I spent a day and a half with > > > checkpatch, but it didn't seem to make sense for the disassembler. > > > > > > The question is should one blindly comply with the rule for > > > machine-generated tables. Editing the code manually introduces the > > > potential for human error. I can, if needed, modify the disassembler > > > generator to output code with the required verbosity. > > > > Thanks for taking a look! Practically, consistency with the rest of the > > code and > > human judgements (comments, explanation in replies etc.) often override the > > checkpatch complaints. Checkpatch is not always right. > > > Thanks. > > Here is a run with [PATCH v1 04/21] removed to make the checkpatch output > more readable. checkpatch is (perhaps incorrectly) flagging a request for > space in a case value that is synthesised from a macro. Case values usually > don't have space between the value and the colon. It's possibly because the > case value is constructed from a macro and contains parenthesis. The other > issue is consistency with existing source in scripts/qemu-binfmt-conf.sh as > previously noted. Agreed. Fam