Re: [dpdk-dev] tools brainstorming

["Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>]

On 4/14/15, 11:19 AM, "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com> wrote:

>
>
>On 4/14/15, 10:24 AM, "Thomas Monjalon" <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
>
>>2015-04-14 15:52, Bruce Richardson:
>>> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 06:16:12PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> > When a consensus is done, it must be added with a patch with custom
>>> > checkpatch addition.
>>> > 
>>> My personal feeling is that we should try and keep checkpatch
>>>modifications to a
>>> minimum. Right now, we can use checkpatch as-is from kernel.org, right?
>>
>>Yes that's something we have to discuss.
>>It should be preferred to avoid "forking" checkpatch.
>>
>>At the moment, I'm using this configuration:
>>
>>	options="$options --max-line-length=100"
>>	options="$options --show-types"
>>	options="$options --ignore=LINUX_VERSION_CODE,FILE_PATH_CHANGES,\
>>	VOLATILE,PREFER_PACKED,PREFER_ALIGNED,PREFER_PRINTF,\
>>	SPLIT_STRING,LINE_SPACING,NEW_TYPEDEFS,COMPLEX_MACRO"
>>
>>	linux/scripts/checkpatch.pl $options
>>
>>I would like to submit a script to run checkpatch with DPDK configuration
>>when the coding rules are clear.
>>
>>However, I've already seen some options which are not enough configurable
>>(don't remember which one). For such corner case, I would see 3 solutions
>>(from the most to the least desired):
>>	- submit a patch to allow more configuration to kernel.org
>>	- give up automatic handling of corner cases
>>	- maintain a fork in scripts/ directory
>Here is the next solution
>	- Stop using checkpatch and use a real tool for formatting code instead.
>If someone uses a tool before commit, then create the patch which does not
>require checkpatch.
>Most of these tools can define an output file or they leave behind the
>original file as a backup or we can see if they have a non-modify mode and
>just points out the problems. As in astyle '--dry-run' can be used, plus
>it saves the original file as XXXXX.orig or you can change the .orig to
>your own value.
>>

Using uncrustify with following config file seems to be very close to what
we have today and removes trailing white spaces. I changed the
indent_with_tabs to 2 instead of 1. I am sure we could even get closer.
The uncrustify creates the updated file into XXXXX.uncrustify which does
not effect the original file. Then you can use meld or some other tool to
view the changes.

http://uncrustify.sourceforge.net/default.cfg


The source is here http://uncrustify.sourceforge.net/ pretty simple
install on my Ubuntu 14.04 machine.

I also installed the amd64 image of UniversalindentGUI. I tried the
ŒUbuntu Software Center¹ version, but it required a bit more effort then
just installing. It appeared the code needed a specific version of a
library I did not track down.

http://uncrustify.sourceforge.net/


It looks like using uncrustify and a config file gives use a tool to
verify the code is formatted correctly before commit and patch create.

Have a look and see what you  think.