Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add check for NONNETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE

[Scott Branden]

Hi Joe,

On 2020-06-10 2:42 p.m., Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 14:33 -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
> > Hi Joe,
> >
> > On 2020-06-10 2:16 p.m., Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 13:26 -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
> > > > NETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE is supported by checkpatch but there
> > > > doesn't seem to be any check for the standard block comment style.
> > > > Add support for NONNETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE to check for empty /*
> > > > on first line of non-networking block comments.
> > > I think there are _way_ too many instances of this form
> > > in non-networking code to enable this.
> > >
> > > $ git grep -P '^\s*/\*\s*\S.*[^\*][^\\]\s*$' -- '*.[ch]' | \
> > >     grep -v -P '^(drivers/net/|net/)' | \
> > >     wc -l
> > > 51407
> > That is true about many things that checkpatch now checks for that
> > didn't previously.
> Not in that quantity of uses it doesn't.
>
> I specifically did _not_ add this very same test
> when I added the other comment tests.
>
> > But, by adding to checkpatch the coding style clearly outlined in
> > coding-style.rst can be followed:
> Well, because there are _so_ many false positives
> that don't need change, I'm not adding this.
>
> As is, I'm nacking it.
>
> If you need it for your use, you should keep it in
> your own tree.
I think this has value for others.
> > > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > []
> > > > @@ -3408,6 +3408,16 @@ sub process {
> > > >    			     "networking block comments don't use an empty /* line, use /* Comment...\n" . $hereprev);
> > > >    		}
> > > >    
> > > > +# Non-Networking with an empty initial /*
> > > > +		if ($realfile !~ m@^(drivers/net/|net/)@ &&
> > > > +		    $prevrawline =~ /^\+[ \t]*\/\*[ \t]/ &&
> > > > +		    $prevrawline !~ /\*\/[ \t]*$/ &&		#no trailing */
> > > > +		    $rawline =~ /^\+[ \t]*\*/ &&
> > > > +		    $realline > 2) {
> > > > +			WARN("NONNETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE",
> > > > +			     "non-networking block comments use an empty /* on first line\n" . $hereprev);
> _Maybe_ this test _might_ be useful if it did a file/patch
> test and used CHK on file, but even then I'm very dubious.
>
> 			my $msg_level = \&WARN;
> 			$msg_level = \&CHK if ($file);
> 			&{msg_level}(etc...)
I can make such change.
As is, checkpatch basically follows the coding style documented for 
networking and has no check for outside.

I do not know the history of the 2 block coding styles but here's a 
radical thought:
Change the coding-style document to pick a single coding style for ALL 
block comment styles and
use that going forward in checkpatch instead?
>