[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] checkpatch: re-enable warnings about split long strings
adrien.mazarguil at 6wind.com
Mon Oct 2 18:21:06 CEST 2017
On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 02:46:24PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 01:53:17PM +0200, Adrien Mazarguil wrote:
> > Hi Stephen,
> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 08:37:49AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > The Linux kernel style policy about strings is that strings should
> > > be always put on one line. This makes sense since a typical use case
> > > is for a user to type the error message into a search engine or
> > > grep, and it won't be found if split across lines. This patch just
> > > re-enables that check.
> > >
> > > Yes, lots of DPDK code now splits strings, that doesn't make it
> > > right.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin at microsoft.com> ---
> > > devtools/checkpatches.sh | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/devtools/checkpatches.sh b/devtools/checkpatches.sh
> > > index a56c41a301c0..3e6081dd673e 100755 ---
> > > a/devtools/checkpatches.sh +++ b/devtools/checkpatches.sh @@ -44,7
> > > +44,6 @@ options="$options --show-types" options="$options
> > > --ignore=LINUX_VERSION_CODE,FILE_PATH_CHANGES,\
> > > VOLATILE,PREFER_PACKED,PREFER_ALIGNED,PREFER_PRINTF,\
> > > PREFER_KERNEL_TYPES,BIT_MACRO,CONST_STRUCT,\
> > > -SPLIT_STRING,LONG_LINE_STRING,\
> > > LINE_SPACING,PARENTHESIS_ALIGNMENT,NETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE,\
> > > NEW_TYPEDEFS,COMPARISON_TO_NULL"
> > I'm not sure, given that the main reason for splitting strings in the
> > first place is to avoid LONG_LINE_STRING warnings, I think we must
> > choose between the two options. If split strings are not allowed, then
> > long lines must be.
> > Since checkpatches.sh is used by various automated scripts to complain
> > loudly about problems in submissions, the above change prevents
> > maintainers from writing long string at all (can't split and can't go
> > past 80 columns).
> > As a result, they will be tempted to cripple their code with nasty
> > workarounds to shut up checkpatches.sh, we don't want that to happen.
> > Also I think the reasons stated by original commit cf75514c8e2e are
> > still relevant. My vote would be to keep things as is.
> In my experience, checkpatch is smart enough to recognise when a long
> line overflows the 80 character limit because of a single long string,
> so the two options are not mutually exclusive. In other words, long
> lines are not allowed except in the case where shortening the line
> involves splitting a string. There may be a small amount of work in
> getting checkpatch happy, i.e. by putting the string on a line on it's
> own, but we can indeed have our cake and eat it too in this case.
I can't seem to get around warnings without ignoring either SPLIT_STRING or
LONG_LINE_STRING as of Linux v4.14-rc3's checkpatch.pl. I think you can only
get around them by fooling it somehow. You really need to ignore at least
LONG_LINE_STRING to meet the requirements of the commit log.
However SPLIT_STRING still looks necessary to address part of cf75514c8e2e
("devtools: ignore warning on long log string"):
"...lines that make use of PRIx64 with string concatenation will still be
flagged if the beginning of the last string fragment begins after the 80
It's not all that uncommon in my opinion.
More information about the dev