[dpdk-dev] coding style question - c99 comments

[dpdk-dev] coding style question - c99 comments

[Lance Richardson]

The DPDK Coding Style document doesn't mention the use of c99 comments
using '//' as a comment delimiter, but it does say that traditional
'/*  */' comment
delimiters should be used and therefore seems to imply that c99-style comments
are not allowed.

Is this correct?

   Lance

Re: [dpdk-dev] coding style question - c99 comments

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 11:05:58 -0500
Lance Richardson <lance.richardson@broadcom.com> wrote:

> The DPDK Coding Style document doesn't mention the use of c99 comments
> using '//' as a comment delimiter, but it does say that traditional
> '/*  */' comment
> delimiters should be used and therefore seems to imply that c99-style comments
> are not allowed.
> 
> Is this correct?
> 
>    Lance

Don't use c99 comments.
These will get flagged by checkpatch

Re: [dpdk-dev] coding style question - c99 comments

[Lance Richardson]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:15 AM Stephen Hemminger
<stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 11:05:58 -0500
> Lance Richardson <lance.richardson@broadcom.com> wrote:
>
> > The DPDK Coding Style document doesn't mention the use of c99 comments
> > using '//' as a comment delimiter, but it does say that traditional
> > '/*  */' comment
> > delimiters should be used and therefore seems to imply that c99-style comments
> > are not allowed.
> >
> > Is this correct?
> >
> >    Lance
>
> Don't use c99 comments.
> These will get flagged by checkpatch

Hi Stephen,

Actually, the reason I was asking was they aren't being flagged by checkpatch.

It seems checkpatch.pl now has this:
my $allow_c99_comments = 1; # Can be overridden by --ignore
C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE

If c99 comments are should not be allowed, it looks like
C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE should
be added to the list of checkers to ignore in checkpatches.sh. I was
thinking of rolling a patch,
but wanted to first confirm that they are actually not allowed.

Thanks,

   Lance

Re: [dpdk-dev] coding style question - c99 comments

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 1/23/2020 4:43 PM, Lance Richardson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:15 AM Stephen Hemminger
> <stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 11:05:58 -0500
>> Lance Richardson <lance.richardson@broadcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The DPDK Coding Style document doesn't mention the use of c99 comments
>>> using '//' as a comment delimiter, but it does say that traditional
>>> '/*  */' comment
>>> delimiters should be used and therefore seems to imply that c99-style comments
>>> are not allowed.
>>>
>>> Is this correct?
>>>
>>>    Lance
>>
>> Don't use c99 comments.
>> These will get flagged by checkpatch
> 
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> Actually, the reason I was asking was they aren't being flagged by checkpatch.
> 
> It seems checkpatch.pl now has this:
> my $allow_c99_comments = 1; # Can be overridden by --ignore
> C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE
> 
> If c99 comments are should not be allowed, it looks like
> C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE should
> be added to the list of checkers to ignore in checkpatches.sh. I was
> thinking of rolling a patch,
> but wanted to first confirm that they are actually not allowed.
> 

Hi Lance,

That is what I understand from coding style document that c99 comments are not
allowed and agree to not use them.

+1 to add C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE

Re: [dpdk-dev] coding style question - c99 comments

[Lance Richardson]

Thanks, a patch adding C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE has been posted.

   Lance

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 12:10 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
wrote:

> On 1/23/2020 4:43 PM, Lance Richardson wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:15 AM Stephen Hemminger
> > <stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 11:05:58 -0500
> >> Lance Richardson <lance.richardson@broadcom.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The DPDK Coding Style document doesn't mention the use of c99 comments
> >>> using '//' as a comment delimiter, but it does say that traditional
> >>> '/*  */' comment
> >>> delimiters should be used and therefore seems to imply that c99-style
> comments
> >>> are not allowed.
> >>>
> >>> Is this correct?
> >>>
> >>>    Lance
> >>
> >> Don't use c99 comments.
> >> These will get flagged by checkpatch
> >
> > Hi Stephen,
> >
> > Actually, the reason I was asking was they aren't being flagged by
> checkpatch.
> >
> > It seems checkpatch.pl now has this:
> > my $allow_c99_comments = 1; # Can be overridden by --ignore
> > C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE
> >
> > If c99 comments are should not be allowed, it looks like
> > C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE should
> > be added to the list of checkers to ignore in checkpatches.sh. I was
> > thinking of rolling a patch,
> > but wanted to first confirm that they are actually not allowed.
> >
>
> Hi Lance,
>
> That is what I understand from coding style document that c99 comments are
> not
> allowed and agree to not use them.
>
> +1 to add C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE
>
>

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] devtools: check c99 comment use in checkpatches.sh

[Lance Richardson]

C99-style comments are not permitted according to DPDK coding
style guidelines, enable checking for these by checkpatch.pl.

Signed-off-by: Lance Richardson <lance.richardson@broadcom.com>
---
v2:
* Fixed a typo in commit message.

 devtools/checkpatches.sh | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/devtools/checkpatches.sh b/devtools/checkpatches.sh
index b16bace92..c996a8780 100755
--- a/devtools/checkpatches.sh
+++ b/devtools/checkpatches.sh
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ VOLATILE,PREFER_PACKED,PREFER_ALIGNED,PREFER_PRINTF,\
 PREFER_KERNEL_TYPES,BIT_MACRO,CONST_STRUCT,\
 SPLIT_STRING,LONG_LINE_STRING,\
 LINE_SPACING,PARENTHESIS_ALIGNMENT,NETWORKING_BLOCK_COMMENT_STYLE,\
-NEW_TYPEDEFS,COMPARISON_TO_NULL"
+NEW_TYPEDEFS,COMPARISON_TO_NULL,C99_COMMENT_TOLERANCE"
 options="$options $DPDK_CHECKPATCH_OPTIONS"
 
 print_usage () {
-- 
2.17.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] devtools: check c99 comment use in checkpatches.sh

[Thomas Monjalon]

15/02/2020 18:09, Lance Richardson:
> C99-style comments are not permitted according to DPDK coding
> style guidelines, enable checking for these by checkpatch.pl.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lance Richardson <lance.richardson@broadcom.com>

Applied, thanks