From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46516) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fo2sI-000733-P3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 04:34:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fo2sD-0004pL-Rl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 04:34:22 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:47382 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fo2sD-0004p2-LS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 04:34:17 -0400 References: <20180809160011.17225-1-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <19a9c0c6-03eb-d368-d8c8-fb62102556a4@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <9da04e7f-bd0c-9d50-fb7c-026b5aaa674c@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:34:14 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Enforce multiline comment syntax List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , "patches@linaro.org" , Thomas Huth On 09/08/2018 19:03, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 9 August 2018 at 17:43, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> I'm still not used to the leeading-/*-on-it's-own style, >>> so having checkpatch catch my lapses is handy... >> >> ... if it's not what we are using, why enforce it? >=20 > See the enormous long threads on the recent changes to CODING_STYLE: > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-06/msg00696.html > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-06/msg02717.html >=20 > Basically, I wanted to rule out things like >=20 > /* this > weirdness */ >=20 > and lots of other people wanted (a) to not have >=20 > /* this thing > * which I think is fine > */ >=20 > and (b) to consistently define only one format as OK. >=20 > So I accepted having my personal preferred format not being > permitted in order to get consensus on getting rid of the > formats I think are really ugly :-) This is one of the cases where we are decently consistent: Lone "/*" or "/**": 9986 cases of which in the first column: 7617 of which the first line in the file (license headers): 2834 regex: ^[ \t]*/\*\*?[ \t]*$ "/*" with the first line of the comment: 11246 of which in the first column: 4985 of which the first line in the file: 97 regex: ^[ \t]*/\*\*?+(?:(?!\*/).)+?$ License headers almost always have the "lone /*" format. Apart from license headers, 63% of the comments have the now-deprecated format. Inside functions, 73% of the comments have the now-deprecated format. Outside functions it's 50-50. That's because there are 2024 doc comments, which in turn are 50% of the comments that are 1) outside the functions 2) using a lone "/*". So my proposal, which is actually consistent with what QEMU is doing, is the following: 1) the first line of a file should always be "/*", otherwise warn 2) a comment that starts with "/**" should have it on a lone line 3) every other multiline comment should start with "/*" Yes, there is overlap between QEMU and Linux developers, but really only in a few subsystems (s390, pSeries, networking---which uses the "other" comment style), and I don't see why we should pretend that QEMU and Linux use similar coding styles. In fact they couldn't be more different: spaces vs. tabs, indent-4 vs. indent-8, camelcase struct names with typedefs... Basically the only thing that is the same is lowercase for variable names and braces on the same line as the statement. Linux's checkpatch was a useful base not because Linux and QEMU are similar, but only because of the complex expression parsing stuff that really is the same for _any_ sane coding style (even GNU ;)). Paolo