Messages in this thread | | | From | Vadim Bendebury <> | Date | Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:20:19 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: prevent reporting C99_COMMENTS error for SPDX tag in .c file |
| |
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 7:47 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: > > (adding Vadem Bendebury who added the tolerance test) > > On Tue, 2020-06-30 at 15:35 +0100, Quentin Monnet wrote: > > When checkpatch.pl is invoked with "--ignore C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE", it > > reports C99-style comments found in the code, by matching on the > > double-slash pattern "//". This includes the leading slashes before the > > SPDX tags that are now used in a majority of C files. > > > > Such tags are commented with the double-slash on purpose, and should not > > trigger errors from checkpatch. Let's ignore them when searching for > > C99-style comments to report. > > > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com> > > I think this unnecessary as perhaps those that want no > c99 comments likely _really_ want no c99 comments. > > > --- > > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 5 ++++- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > index 3cacc122c528..67f350c580ea 100755 > > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > @@ -3983,7 +3983,10 @@ sub process { > > } > > > > # no C99 // comments > > - if ($line =~ m{//}) { > > + if ($line =~ m{//} && > > + !($rawline =~ m{// SPDX-License-Identifier:} && > > + $realfile =~ /\.c$/ && Do I understand this right that with this change in the check would be applied to .c files only? .h files should be included. > > + $realline == $checklicenseline)) { What is the purpose of the above check? > > if (ERROR("C99_COMMENTS", > > "do not use C99 // comments\n" . $herecurr) && > > $fix) { >
| |