Re: [PATCH] staging:vt6656:baseband.h: fix function definition argument without identifier name issue

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 06:25:20PM +0530, Arushi wrote:
> Function definitions arguments should also have an identifier name as 
> reported by checkpatch.pl.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arushi Singhal 

This name does not match up with your From: line :(

Also, please wrap your changelog text at the correct width.

thanks,

greg k-h
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: Re: [PATCH] staging:vt6656:baseband.h: fix function definition argument without identifier name issue

[Joe Perches]

On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 18:49 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 09:37:23AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 16:57 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:23:45PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:06:02PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:50:18PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> > > > > > Function definitions arguments should also have an identifier name 
> > > > > > as reported by checkpatch.pl.
> > 
> > []
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h 
> > > > > > b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> > 
> > []
> > > > > > @@ -86,15 +86,15 @@ struct vnt_phy_field {
> > > > > >  unsigned int vnt_get_frame_time(u8 preamble_type, u8 pkt_type,
> > > > > > unsigned int frame_length, u16 
> > > > > > tx_rate);p
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > -void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *, u32 frame_length,
> > > > > > -  u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field 
> > > > > > *);
> > > > > > -
> > > > > > -void vnt_set_short_slot_time(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > > > -void vnt_set_vga_gain_offset(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > > > > > -void vnt_set_antenna_mode(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > > > > > -int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > > > -void vnt_set_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > > > -void vnt_exit_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > > > -void vnt_update_pre_ed_threshold(struct vnt_private *, int 
> > > > > > scanning);
> > > > > > +void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *priv, u32 frame_length,
> > > > > > +  u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field 
> > > > > > *phy);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > 
> > > > > Really?  Since when is this a coding style requirement?
> > > > 
> > > > This requirement is really new. It was proposed by Joe Perches at 26 
> > > > Sep 2016:
> > > > [PATCH] checkpatch: Add warning for unnamed function definition.
> > > > 
> > > > Should this type of warnings be fixed here?
> > > 
> > > Ugh, Joe, why did you add this option?
> > 
> > 
> > 1. Most all kernel prototypes use named arguments.
> > 2. It helps make header files easier to read/lookup with grep.
> > 
> > int func(int, int, int)
> > vs
> > int func(int weight, int density, int mass)
> > 
> > which is easier for humans to use?
> 
> 
> Yes, which is why I use that format, but is it something we are now
> going to suddenly require?
> 
> Also, this is going to take a lot more work to review patches like this,
> to match up the variable names to ensure that the developer got it
> right...

Coccinelle to the rescue...

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-kernel-janitors/msg28450.html

Julia Lawall wrote a script for that.
Unfortunately, it doesn't currently span .h and .c files

---

@r@
identifier f;
position p;
type T, t;
parameter list[n] ps;
@@

T f@p(ps,t,...);

@s@
identifier r.f,x;
type r.T, r.t;
parameter list[r.n] ps;
@@

T f(ps,t x,...) { ... }

@@
identifier r.f, s.x;
position r.p;
type r.T, r.t;
parameter list[r.n] ps;
@@

T f@p(ps,t
+ x
  ,...);


___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: Re: [PATCH] staging:vt6656:baseband.h: fix function definition argument without identifier name issue

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 09:37:23AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 16:57 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:23:45PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:06:02PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:50:18PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> > > > > Function definitions arguments should also have an identifier name as 
> > > > > reported by checkpatch.pl.
> []
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h 
> > > > > b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> []
> > > > > @@ -86,15 +86,15 @@ struct vnt_phy_field {
> > > > >  unsigned int vnt_get_frame_time(u8 preamble_type, u8 pkt_type,
> > > > >   unsigned int frame_length, u16 
> > > > > tx_rate);p
> > > > >  
> > > > > -void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *, u32 frame_length,
> > > > > -u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field 
> > > > > *);
> > > > > -
> > > > > -void vnt_set_short_slot_time(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > > -void vnt_set_vga_gain_offset(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > > > > -void vnt_set_antenna_mode(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > > > > -int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > > -void vnt_set_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > > -void vnt_exit_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > > -void vnt_update_pre_ed_threshold(struct vnt_private *, int scanning);
> > > > > +void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *priv, u32 frame_length,
> > > > > +u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field 
> > > > > *phy);
> > > > > +
> > > > Really?  Since when is this a coding style requirement?
> > > This requirement is really new. It was proposed by Joe Perches at 26 Sep 
> > > 2016:
> > > [PATCH] checkpatch: Add warning for unnamed function definition.
> > > 
> > > Should this type of warnings be fixed here?
> > Ugh, Joe, why did you add this option?
> 
> 1. Most all kernel prototypes use named arguments.
> 2. It helps make header files easier to read/lookup with grep.
> 
> int func(int, int, int)
> vs
> int func(int weight, int density, int mass)
> 
> which is easier for humans to use?

Yes, which is why I use that format, but is it something we are now
going to suddenly require?

Also, this is going to take a lot more work to review patches like this,
to match up the variable names to ensure that the developer got it
right...

thanks,

greg k-h
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: Re: [PATCH] staging:vt6656:baseband.h: fix function definition argument without identifier name issue

[Joe Perches]

On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 16:57 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:23:45PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:06:02PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:50:18PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> > > > Function definitions arguments should also have an identifier name as 
> > > > reported by checkpatch.pl.
[]
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h 
> > > > b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
[]
> > > > @@ -86,15 +86,15 @@ struct vnt_phy_field {
> > > >  unsigned int vnt_get_frame_time(u8 preamble_type, u8 pkt_type,
> > > > unsigned int frame_length, u16 
> > > > tx_rate);p
> > > >  
> > > > -void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *, u32 frame_length,
> > > > -  u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field 
> > > > *);
> > > > -
> > > > -void vnt_set_short_slot_time(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > -void vnt_set_vga_gain_offset(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > > > -void vnt_set_antenna_mode(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > > > -int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > -void vnt_set_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > -void vnt_exit_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > > > -void vnt_update_pre_ed_threshold(struct vnt_private *, int scanning);
> > > > +void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *priv, u32 frame_length,
> > > > +  u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field 
> > > > *phy);
> > > > +
> > > Really?  Since when is this a coding style requirement?
> > This requirement is really new. It was proposed by Joe Perches at 26 Sep 
> > 2016:
> > [PATCH] checkpatch: Add warning for unnamed function definition.
> > 
> > Should this type of warnings be fixed here?
> Ugh, Joe, why did you add this option?

1. Most all kernel prototypes use named arguments.
2. It helps make header files easier to read/lookup with grep.

int func(int, int, int)
vs
int func(int weight, int density, int mass)

which is easier for humans to use?

___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: Re: [PATCH] staging:vt6656:baseband.h: fix function definition argument without identifier name issue

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:23:45PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:06:02PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:50:18PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> > > Function definitions arguments should also have an identifier name as 
> > > reported by checkpatch.pl.
> > 
> > Please wrap your changelog comments at 72 columns.
> > 
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mikhail Golubev 
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h | 20 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h 
> > > b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> > > index 7cc1387..fe1c25c 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> > > @@ -86,15 +86,15 @@ struct vnt_phy_field {
> > >  unsigned int vnt_get_frame_time(u8 preamble_type, u8 pkt_type,
> > >   unsigned int frame_length, u16 tx_rate);
> > >  
> > > -void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *, u32 frame_length,
> > > -u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field *);
> > > -
> > > -void vnt_set_short_slot_time(struct vnt_private *);
> > > -void vnt_set_vga_gain_offset(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > > -void vnt_set_antenna_mode(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > > -int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *);
> > > -void vnt_set_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > > -void vnt_exit_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > > -void vnt_update_pre_ed_threshold(struct vnt_private *, int scanning);
> > > +void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *priv, u32 frame_length,
> > > +u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field *phy);
> > > +
> > 
> > Really?  Since when is this a coding style requirement?
> > 
> 
> This requirement is really new. It was proposed by Joe Perches at 26 Sep 2016:
> [PATCH] checkpatch: Add warning for unnamed function definition.
> 
> Should this type of warnings be fixed here?

Ugh, Joe, why did you add this option?

What is it going to help out with?

thanks,

greg k-h
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: Re: [PATCH] staging:vt6656:baseband.h: fix function definition argument without identifier name issue

[Mikhail Golubev]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:06:02PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:50:18PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> > Function definitions arguments should also have an identifier name as 
> > reported by checkpatch.pl.
> 
> Please wrap your changelog comments at 72 columns.
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mikhail Golubev 
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h | 20 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h 
> > b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> > index 7cc1387..fe1c25c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> > @@ -86,15 +86,15 @@ struct vnt_phy_field {
> >  unsigned int vnt_get_frame_time(u8 preamble_type, u8 pkt_type,
> > unsigned int frame_length, u16 tx_rate);
> >  
> > -void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *, u32 frame_length,
> > -  u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field *);
> > -
> > -void vnt_set_short_slot_time(struct vnt_private *);
> > -void vnt_set_vga_gain_offset(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > -void vnt_set_antenna_mode(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> > -int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *);
> > -void vnt_set_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > -void vnt_exit_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> > -void vnt_update_pre_ed_threshold(struct vnt_private *, int scanning);
> > +void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *priv, u32 frame_length,
> > +  u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field *phy);
> > +
> 
> Really?  Since when is this a coding style requirement?
> 

This requirement is really new. It was proposed by Joe Perches at 26 Sep 2016:
[PATCH] checkpatch: Add warning for unnamed function definition.

Should this type of warnings be fixed here?

> Don't use --strict, it's not worth it for stuff like this, there are far
> worse-off files in drivers/staging/ than this one.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Best wishes,
Mike.
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Re: [PATCH] staging:vt6656:baseband.h: fix function definition argument without identifier name issue

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:50:18PM +0300, Mikhail Golubev wrote:
> Function definitions arguments should also have an identifier name as 
> reported by checkpatch.pl.

Please wrap your changelog comments at 72 columns.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Mikhail Golubev 
> ---
>  drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h | 20 ++--
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h 
> b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> index 7cc1387..fe1c25c 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.h
> @@ -86,15 +86,15 @@ struct vnt_phy_field {
>  unsigned int vnt_get_frame_time(u8 preamble_type, u8 pkt_type,
>   unsigned int frame_length, u16 tx_rate);
>  
> -void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *, u32 frame_length,
> -u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field *);
> -
> -void vnt_set_short_slot_time(struct vnt_private *);
> -void vnt_set_vga_gain_offset(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> -void vnt_set_antenna_mode(struct vnt_private *, u8);
> -int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *);
> -void vnt_set_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> -void vnt_exit_deep_sleep(struct vnt_private *);
> -void vnt_update_pre_ed_threshold(struct vnt_private *, int scanning);
> +void vnt_get_phy_field(struct vnt_private *priv, u32 frame_length,
> +u16 tx_rate, u8 pkt_type, struct vnt_phy_field *phy);
> +

Really?  Since when is this a coding style requirement?

Don't use --strict, it's not worth it for stuff like this, there are far
worse-off files in drivers/staging/ than this one.

thanks,

greg k-h
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel