On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 00:16 +0000, Mac Xu wrote:
> > On Mon, 2024-04-01 at 14:21 +1300, Barry Song wrote:
> > > From: Xining Xu <mac.xxn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > If function-like macros do not utilize a parameter, it might result in a
> > > build warning. In our coding style guidelines, we advocate for utilizing
> > > static inline functions to replace such macros. This patch verifies
> > > compliance with the new rule.
> > >
> > > For a macro such as the one below,
> > >
> > > #define test(a) do { } while (0)
> > >
> > > The test result is as follows.
> > >
> > > ERROR: Parameter 'a' is not used in function-like macro, please use static
> > > inline instead
> > > #21: FILE: mm/init-mm.c:20:
> > > +#define test(a) do { } while (0)
> >
> > This is no longer true.
> > Please update the ERROR->WARN and message as below
> >
> > Ideally, this would have an update to
> > Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst
> >
> > to describe the new --verbose message type
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> Thank you for the comments, here's the code:
>
> +# check if this is an unused argument
> +if ($define_stmt !~ /\b$arg\b/) {
> + WARN("MACRO_ARG_UNUSED",
> + "Argument '$arg' is not used in function-like macro\n" . "$herectx");
> +}
>
> and here's the document for it which is inserted into the "Macros, Attributes and
> Symbols" section of checkpatch.rst starting from line 909:
> +
> + **MACRO_ARG_UNUSED**
> + If function-like macros do not utilize a parameter, it might result
> + in a build warning. We advocate for utilizing static inline functions
> + to replace such macros.
> + For example, for a macro as below::
> +
> + #define test(a) do { } while (0)
> +
> + there would be a warning as below::
> +
> + WARNING: Parameter 'a' is not used in function-like macro, please use
> + static inline instead.
>
> Please let me know if the document needs further re-wording to make it helpful enough
> to the readers.
Hi again Xining.
Thanks.
That looks good but it doesn't match the script output
which doesn't use ", please use static inline instead."
(and I believe the script should not output that too)
Another good thing would be to add a line like:
See: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html#macros-enums-and-rtl
For example, from: checkpatch.rst
**ALLOC_SIZEOF_STRUCT**
The allocation style is bad. In general for family of
allocation functions using sizeof() to get memory size,
constructs like::
p = alloc(sizeof(struct foo), ...)
should be::
p = alloc(sizeof(*p), ...)
See: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html#allocating-memory
