From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB15A05A1 for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 05:30:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AED951D429; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 05:30:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dpdk.org (Postfix, from userid 1017) id AFD6F1D41C; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 05:30:56 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20200422033006.1124-3-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> References: <20200422033006.1124-3-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> To: test-report@dpdk.org Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli Message-Id: <20200422033056.AFD6F1D41C@dpdk.org> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 05:30:56 +0200 (CEST) From: checkpatch@dpdk.org Subject: [dpdk-test-report] |WARNING| pw69071 [PATCH v5 2/4] test/rcu: test cases for RCU defer queue APIs X-BeenThere: test-report@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: automatic DPDK test reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: test-report-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "test-report" Test-Label: checkpatch Test-Status: WARNING http://dpdk.org/patch/69071 _coding style issues_ WARNING:MACRO_WITH_FLOW_CONTROL: Macros with flow control statements should be avoided #92: FILE: app/test/test_rcu_qsbr.c:29: +#define TEST_RCU_QSBR_GOTO_IF_ERROR(label, cond, str, ...) \ +do { \ + if (cond) { \ + printf("ERROR file %s, line %d: " str " ", __FILE__, \ + __LINE__, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ + goto label; \ + } \ +} while (0) total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 408 lines checked