looks like I am replying to the wrong thread. will send a new email to the latest one ...
Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]> 于2022年5月17日周二 16:51写道： > > > On 17 May 2022, at 9:20, Peng He wrote: > > > You mean I can ignore the following warnings? > > > > " > > checkpatch: > > ERROR: Author Peng He <[email protected]> needs to sign off. > > WARNING: Unexpected sign-offs from developers who are not authors or > > co-authors or committers: Peng He <[email protected]> > > Lines checked: 98, Warnings: 1, Errors: 1 > > " > > I think these are because of your mixed email address. Ilya can probably > answer this, but I think he will fix this on commit, Ilya? > > > > > Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]> 于2022年5月17日周二 14:26写道： > > > >> > >> > >> On 17 May 2022, at 7:49, Peng He wrote: > >> > >>> The only issue I have is that I have to use the company's email address > >> to > >>> submit patches > >>> while I am using the personal email to subscribe to the maillist. > >>> > >>> So the bot will always warn about the author needing to sign-off. > >>> Perhaps in the future I would use both email addresses to avoid this > >>> warning. > >> > >> There is this error on patch 1/3: > >> > >> ERROR: Co-author Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]> needs to sign > off. > >> > >> So I guess you need to add my sign-off also in that patch. > >>> > >>> > >>> Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]> 于2022年5月16日周一 19:36写道： > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 16 May 2022, at 12:19, Peng He wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]> 于2022年5月16日周一 17:12写道： > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 14 May 2022, at 10:40, Peng He wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Peng He <[email protected]> > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> utilities/checkpatch.py | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> diff --git a/utilities/checkpatch.py b/utilities/checkpatch.py > >>>>>>> index 8c7faa419..67c517b69 100755 > >>>>>>> --- a/utilities/checkpatch.py > >>>>>>> +++ b/utilities/checkpatch.py > >>>>>>> @@ -619,6 +619,8 @@ def regex_function_factory(func_name): > >>>>>>> def regex_error_factory(description): > >>>>>>> return lambda: print_error(description) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Need extra newline, install flake8 and you will get the error at > >> compile > >>>>>> time. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> +def regex_warn_factory(description): > >>>>>>> + return lambda: print_warning(description) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Need extra newline, install flake8 and you will get the error at > >> compile > >>>>>> time. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> std_functions = [ > >>>>>>> ('malloc', 'Use xmalloc() in place of malloc()'), > >>>>>>> @@ -636,6 +638,7 @@ std_functions = [ > >>>>>>> ('assert', 'Use ovs_assert() in place of assert()'), > >>>>>>> ('error', 'Use ovs_error() in place of error()'), > >>>>>>> ] > >>>>>>> + > >>>>>>> checks += [ > >>>>>>> {'regex': r'(\.c|\.h)(\.in)?$', > >>>>>>> 'match_name': None, > >>>>>>> @@ -644,6 +647,21 @@ checks += [ > >>>>>>> 'print': regex_error_factory(description)} > >>>>>>> for (function_name, description) in std_functions] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> +experimental_api = [ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I do not think this is an experimental API, I would call it > something > >>>> like > >>>>>> a suspicious API maybe? > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> or change to easy_to_misused_api? > >>>> > >>>> This is fine by me to. > >>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> + ('ovsrcu_barrier', > >>>>>>> + 'lib/ovs-rcu.c', > >>>>>>> + 'Are you sure you need to use ovsrcu_barrier(),' > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Here you need to add a space at the end, as the error message now > >> looks > >>>>>> like: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> WARNING: Are you sure you need to use ovsrcu_barrier(),in most > cases > >>>>>> ovsrcu_synchronize() will be fine? > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> + 'in most cases ovsrcu_synchronize() will be fine?'), > >>>>>>> + ] > >>>>>>> + > >>>>>>> +checks += [ > >>>>>>> + {'regex': r'(\.c)(\.in)?$', > >>>>>>> + 'match_name': lambda x: x != location, > >>>>>>> + 'prereq': lambda x: not is_comment_line(x), > >>>>>>> + 'check': regex_function_factory(function_name), > >>>>>>> + 'print': regex_warn_factory(description)} > >>>>>>> + for (function_name, location, description) in > experimental_api] > >>>>>>> + > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> def regex_operator_factory(operator): > >>>>>>> regex = re.compile(r'^[^#][^"\']*[^ "]%s[^ "\'][^"]*' % > >> operator) > >>>>>>> @@ -676,12 +694,20 @@ def get_file_type_checks(filename): > >>>>>>> global checks > >>>>>>> checkList = [] > >>>>>>> for check in checks: > >>>>>>> + regex_check = True > >>>>>>> + match_check = True > >>>>>>> + > >>>>>>> if check['regex'] is None and check['match_name'] is None: > >>>>>>> checkList.append(check) > >>>>>>> + continue > >>>>>>> + > >>>>>>> if check['regex'] is not None and \ > >>>>>>> - re.compile(check['regex']).search(filename) is not > None: > >>>>>>> - checkList.append(check) > >>>>>>> - elif check['match_name'] is not None and > >>>>>> check['match_name'](filename): > >>>>>>> + re.compile(check['regex']).search(filename) is None: > >>>>>>> + regex_check = False > >>>>>>> + elif check['match_name'] is not None and not > >>>>>> check['match_name'](filename): > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Line is too long so you need to break it up: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> utilities/checkpatch.py:709:80: E501 line too long (83 > 79 > >> characters) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> + match_check = False > >>>>>>> + > >>>>>>> + if regex_check and match_check: > >>>>>>> checkList.append(check) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Would it not make more sense to re-write the above elif cases to a > >>>> single > >>>>>> case? > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> return checkList > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> 2.25.1 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> will send a new version， thanks for the detailed review. > >>>> > >>>> You can also add my Signed-off-by: if you make the suggested changes > to > >>>> keep the robot happy. > >>>> > >>>> //Eelco > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> hepeng > >> > >> > > > > -- > > hepeng > > -- hepeng _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
