linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/12] staging: lustre: Fix misplaced opening brace warnings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1408111619510.2518@hadrien>
Date:	Mon, 11 Aug 2014 16:21:23 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
cc:	Srikrishan Malik <srikrishanmalik@...il.com>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>, greg@...ah.com,
	andreas.dilger@...el.com, oleg.drokin@...el.com,
	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
	Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/12] staging: lustre: Fix misplaced opening brace
 warnings



On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, Joe Perches wrote:

> On Mon, 2014-08-11 at 16:27 +0530, Srikrishan Malik wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 09:35:43AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 19:01 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 09:01:36PM +0530, Srikrishan Malik wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 11:18:13PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > > > That looks silly before and after.  Everything is indented in a funny
> > > > > > way.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this better:
> > > > >
> > > > > 	static const ldlm_policy_data_t lookup_policy = {
> > > > > 				.l_inodebits = { MDS_INODELOCK_LOOKUP }
> > > > > 	};
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > That is indented too far.
> > > >
> > > > Honestly, I think it looks best on one line but in terms of real life we
> > > > can't ignore checkpatch warnings because eventually someone else will
> > > > try to "fix" it to not be on one line.
> []
> > > I think it looks odd to mix named and unnamed
> > > initializers for the typedef and its members.
> > >
> > > ldlm_policy_data_t is a union and it could be
> > > explicit instead of a typedef.
> > >
> > > Perhaps:
> > > 	static const union ldlm_policy_data lookup_policy = {
> > > 		.l_inodebits = {
> > > 			.bits = MDS_INODELOCK_LOOKUP,
> > > 		},
> > > 	};
> > >
> > > or maybe use another DECLARE_<foo> macro indirection.
> > >
> >
> > This patch set is aimed at removing checkpatch issues from files in
> > lustre/lustre/mdc.
>
> I think eliminating checkpatch identified issues should
> not be the primary goal but a secondary one to the
> overall goal of code style uniformity.
>
> Julia Lawall and Himangi Saraogi from coccinelle fame
> have created a "detypedef" script that is useful for
> structs, perhaps you could extend it for unions and
> run it over this lustre code.
>
> For instance:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/9/104

The complete semantic patch is below.  It is in two parts: first for the
case where there is a name for the struct and the second for the case
where there is not.  The code could be extended to automatically drop the
_t's that are commonly put on typedefs.

julia

@tn@
identifier i;
type td;
@@

-typedef
 struct i { ... }
-td
 ;

@@
type tn.td;
identifier tn.i;
@@

-td
+ struct i

// ----------------------------------------------------------------------
// No name case

@tn1@
type td;
@@

typedef struct { ... } td;

@script:python tf@
td << tn1.td;
tdres;
@@

coccinelle.tdres = td

@@
type tn1.td;
identifier tf.tdres;
@@

-typedef
 struct
+  tdres
   { ... }
-td
 ;

@@
type tn1.td;
identifier tf.tdres;
@@

-td
+ struct tdres
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/