On 17/03/16 11:27, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2016, Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[ text/plain ]
On 11/03/16 15:31, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Makes sure that the diff line adding the BUG is not immediately
preceded by the diff line removing the BUG. Or in other words,
avoids false positives when existing BUG is edited.
v2: Sent the incomplete version out...
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
---
dim | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/dim b/dim
index 1e7622a1e902..5392c64bf5b4 100755
--- a/dim
+++ b/dim
@@ -691,7 +691,8 @@ function shell_checkpatch
local cmd=$1
$cmd | scripts/checkpatch.pl -q --strict - || true
- if $cmd | grep '^\+.*\WBUG' > /dev/null; then
+ local bug_lines=$("$cmd" | grep -m 1 -B 1 '^\+.*\WBUG' | grep -c '^[+-].*\WBUG')
+ if test "$bug_lines" -eq 1; then
warn_or_fail "New BUG macro added"
fi
$cmd | grep '^\+.*drm_i915_private_t' > /dev/null && echo "WARNING: New drm_i915_private_t added" || true
Are we interested in this?
Yes. Sorry, I've updated these lines so you'll need to rebase, I'm
afraid.
I'd also be fine with comparing the results of $(grep -c '^\+.*\WBUG)
and $(grep -c '^\-.*\WBUG) and complaining if there are more +'s than
-'s. But your stricter version is fine too.
BR,
Jani.
The version above doesn't really avoid all the issues, though; for
example if the edited BUG spans multiple lines, or if the pattern
spotted (first added line containing a word beginning with BUG) is in a
comment or string, or what's actually happened is that some code has
been moved from before an existing BUG() to after or vice-versa, but
diff thinks you've deleted the old BUG() and added a new one :(
.Dave.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
