[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] cleanup: Tweak and re-run return_directly.cocci

From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cleanup: Tweak and re-run return_directly.cocci
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 15:51:24 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.0

On 22/11/22 09:58, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> writes:

On 21/11/2022 17.32, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org> writes:

On 21/11/22 15:36, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 14:03, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:

Tweak the semantic patch to drop redundant parenthesis around the
return expression.

Coccinelle drops comments in hw/rdma/vmw/pvrdma_cmd.c; restored

Coccinelle messes up vmdk_co_create(), not sure why.  Transformed

Line breaks in target/avr/cpu.h and hw/rdma/vmw/pvrdma_cmd.c tidied up

Whitespace in fuse_reply_iov() tidied up manually.

checkpatch.pl complains "return of an errno should typically be -ve"
two times for hw/9pfs/9p-synth.c.  Preexisting, the patch merely makes
it visible to checkpatch.pl.

checkpatch.pl complains "return is not a function, parentheses are not
required" three times for target/mips/tcg/dsp_helper.c.  False

Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>

    .../user/ase/msa/bit-count/test_msa_nloc_b.c  |   9 +-
    .../user/ase/msa/bit-count/test_msa_nloc_d.c  |   9 +-
[snip long list of other mips test files]

    328 files changed, 989 insertions(+), 2099 deletions(-)
This patch seems to almost entirely be huge because of these
mips test case files. Are they specific to QEMU or are they
effectively a 3rd-party import that it doesn't make sense
to make local changes to?

They are imported and will unlikely be modified.

Not obvious to me from git-log.

Should I drop the changes to tests/tcg/mips/?

I'd say yes. At least move them to a separate patch.

Possible status of tests/tcg/mips/:

1. Imported, should not be modified

    Drop from the patch.

2. Not imported, should be modified

2a. To be reviewed separately from the remainder of the patch

     Split off.

2b. Likewise, but nobody will care to review, realistically

     Split off and merge anyway, or drop.  I'd go for the latter.

2c. To be reviewed together with the remainder of the patch

     Keep as is.

Which one is it?

"1. Imported, should not be modified" please :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]