Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] checkpatch: volatile with a comment or sig_atomic_t is okay

[Marc-André Lureau]

Hi

----- Original Message -----
> From: Marc-André Lureau <address@hidden>
> 
> This assumes that the comment gives some justification;
> "volatile sig_atomic_t" is also self-explanatory and usually
> correct.
> 
> Discussed in:
> '[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] dump-guest-memory.py: fix "You can't do that without a
> process to debug"'
> 
> Suggested-by: Fam Zheng <address@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <address@hidden>
> Message-Id: <address@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>

Thanks, I can add it to my 2 patches series for dump (to avoid error on Peter's 
end)

Unless you send a pull request with it sonnish


> ---
>  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 7 +++++--
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index 34df753571..3dc27d9656 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -2475,8 +2475,11 @@ sub process {
>  
>  # no volatiles please
>               my $asm_volatile = 
> qr{\b(__asm__|asm)\s+(__volatile__|volatile)\b};
> -             if ($line =~ /\bvolatile\b/ && $line !~ /$asm_volatile/) {
> -                     ERROR("Use of volatile is usually wrong: see
> Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt\n" . $herecurr);
> +             if ($line =~ /\bvolatile\b/ && $line !~ /$asm_volatile/ &&
> +                    $line !~ /sig_atomic_t/ &&
> +                    !ctx_has_comment($first_line, $linenr)) {
> +                     my $msg = "Use of volatile is usually wrong, please add 
> a comment\n" .
> $herecurr;
> +                        ERROR($msg);
>               }
>  
>  # warn about #if 0
> --
> 2.14.3
> 
>