lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v1] checkpatch: Handle FILE pointer type
From

On 02/09/2022 12:39, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-09-02 at 11:04 +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>> On 01/09/2022 20:22, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2022-09-01 at 11:49 -0400, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2022-09-01 at 16:59 +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>>>>> When using a "FILE *" type, checkpatch considers this an error. Fix
>>>>> this by explicitly defining "FILE" as a common type.
>>>> []
>>>>> Another error may be throw when we use FIXTURE_{DATA,VARIANT}() structs,
>>>>> as defined in kselftest_harness.h .
>>>> []
>>>>> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>>>> []
>>>>> @@ -576,10 +576,17 @@ our $typeKernelTypedefs = qr{(?x:
>>>>> (?:__)?(?:u|s|be|le)(?:8|16|32|64)|
>>>>> atomic_t
>>>>> )};
>>>>> +our $typeStdioTypedefs = qr{(?x:
>>>>> + FILE
>>>>> +)};
>>>>
>>>> I'm fine with this.
>>>>
>>>>> +# our $typeKselftestHarnessTypedefs = qr{(?x:
>>>>> +# FIXTURE_(?:DATA|VARIANT)\($Ident\)
>>>>> +# )};
>>>>
>>>> But not this. Random userspace typedefs should likely
>>>> be kept in some local version of checkpatch.
>>>>
>>>> Or maybe add a command line option like --additional_typedefs=<file>.
>>>
>>> Oops. I forgot it already exists:
>>>
>>> --typedefsfile Read additional types from this file
>>>
>>> commit 75ad8c575a5ad105e2afc2051c68abceb9c65431
>>> Author: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org>
>>> Date: Mon May 8 15:56:00 2017 -0700
>>>
>>> checkpatch: add --typedefsfile
>>>
>>> When using checkpatch on out-of-tree code, it may occur that some
>>> project-specific types are used, which will cause spurious warnings.
>>> Add the --typedefsfile option as a way to extend the known types and
>>> deal with this issue.
>>
>> This doesn't work for the FIXTURE_DATA() case.
>
> checkpatch is a stupid little script.
> It's not a c preprocessor nor a syntax complete compiler.
> It's really easy for macros to make its output invalid.
> If you feed obfuscated c to checkpatch, it'd be confused.
> (Same is true for tools like coccinelle btw, though cocci is far better)
> checkpatch will never be comprehensive nor perfect.
> It's expected its users will use their common sense about its
> output message validity.
>
>> And I'm not sure how
>> contributors would know that they need to use this option with a
>> specific file.
>
> --help exists
>
> Maybe Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst could be expanded for
> --verbose mode.

I was thinking about which file to use, but I understand your point.
I'll send a v2 with only the "FILE" addition.
FIXTURE_{DATA,VARIANT}() will just not be handled but that's OK.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-09-02 13:06    [W:0.044 / U:0.520 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site