Hi Michael, On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote:> Add virt_ barriers to list of barriers to check for > presence of a comment. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> > --- > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > index 15cfca4..4466579 100755 > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > @@ -5133,7 +5133,8 @@ sub process { > }x; > my $all_barriers = qr{ > $barriers| > - smp_(?:$smp_barrier_stems) > + smp_(?:$smp_barrier_stems)| > + virt_(?:$smp_barrier_stems)Sorry I'm late to the party here, but would it make sense to write this as: (?:smp|virt)_(?:$smp_barrier_stems) Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby at gmail.com Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
On Mon, 2016-01-11 at 09:13 +1100, Julian Calaby wrote:> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > Add virt_ barriers to list of barriers to check for > > presence of a comment.[]> > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl[]> > @@ -5133,7 +5133,8 @@ sub process { > > ????????????????}x; > > ????????????????my $all_barriers = qr{ > > ????????????????????????$barriers| > > -???????????????????????smp_(?:$smp_barrier_stems) > > +???????????????????????smp_(?:$smp_barrier_stems)| > > +???????????????????????virt_(?:$smp_barrier_stems) > > Sorry I'm late to the party here, but would it make sense to write this as: > > (?:smp|virt)_(?:$smp_barrier_stems)Yes. Perhaps the name might be better as barrier_stems. Also, ideally this would be longest match first or use \b after the matches so that $all_barriers could work successfully without a following \s*\( my $all_barriers = qr{ (?:smp|virt)_(?:barrier_stems)| $barriers) }x; or maybe add separate $smp_barriers and $virt_barriers <shrug> it doesn't matter much in any case
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 02:52:16PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:> On Mon, 2016-01-11 at 09:13 +1100, Julian Calaby wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > Add virt_ barriers to list of barriers to check for > > > presence of a comment. > [] > > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > [] > > > @@ -5133,7 +5133,8 @@ sub process { > > > ????????????????}x; > > > ????????????????my $all_barriers = qr{ > > > ????????????????????????$barriers| > > > -???????????????????????smp_(?:$smp_barrier_stems) > > > +???????????????????????smp_(?:$smp_barrier_stems)| > > > +???????????????????????virt_(?:$smp_barrier_stems) > > > > Sorry I'm late to the party here, but would it make sense to write this as: > > > > (?:smp|virt)_(?:$smp_barrier_stems) > > Yes. Perhaps the name might be better as barrier_stems. > > Also, ideally this would be longest match first or use \b > after the matches so that $all_barriers could work > successfully without a following \s*\( > > my $all_barriers = qr{ > (?:smp|virt)_(?:barrier_stems)| > $barriers) > }x; > > or maybe add separate $smp_barriers and $virt_barriers > > <shrug> it doesn't matter much in any caseOK just to clarify - are you OK with merging the patch as is? Refactorings can come as patches on top if required. -- MST