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

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

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
>>
>>