[PATCH u-boot 05/39] checkpatch: require quotes around section name in the __section() macro

[Marek Behun <marek.behun@nic.cz>]

On Sun, 7 Mar 2021 05:47:56 +0100
Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:

> On 3/7/21 5:25 AM, Marek Beh?n wrote:
> > This is how Linux does this now, see Linux commit 339f29d91acf.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Beh?n <marek.behun@nic.cz>
> > ---
> >   scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > index 755f4802a4..fd1e9c4d24 100755
> > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > @@ -6065,7 +6065,7 @@ sub process {
> >   			my $old = substr($rawline, $-[1], $+[1] - $-[1]);
> >   			my $new = substr($old, 1, -1);
> >   			if (WARN("PREFER_SECTION",
> > -				 "__section($new) is preferred over __attribute__((section($old)))\n" . $herecurr) &&
> > +				 "__section(\"$new\") is preferred over __attribute__((section($old)))\n" . $herecurr) &&
> >   			    $fix) {
> >   				$fixed[$fixlinenr] =~ s/\b__attribute__\s*\(\s*\(\s*_*section_*\s*\(\s*\Q$old\E\s*\)\s*\)\s*\)/__section($new)/;  
> 
> Shouldn't some of the patches which are clearly fixes be sent as 
> separate fixes, so they can be picked while the LTO support is being 
> worked on ?

Yes, ideally it would be better, but:

this patch is connected to patch 6 of this series, and patch 6 needs to
be in this series because otherwise people trying to apply this series
would get an error.

The first 4 patches are also fixes for something else, but they
were discovered thanks to LTO and without them users will get
warnings/errors when trying to build for some boards.

Tom, should I send these patches separately? Also the first 3 patches
should maybe be applied via Stefan and Simon, via their trees...

Marek