From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7559548B0C for ; Fri, 14 Nov 2025 18:45:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FE6F40E19; Fri, 14 Nov 2025 18:45:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.24.197]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84FDC40E19 for ; Fri, 14 Nov 2025 18:45:55 +0100 (CET) Received: by dpdk.org (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 7D2C71261F3; Fri, 14 Nov 2025 18:45:00 +0100 (CET) Subject: |WARNING| pw158806 [PATCH v2 13/19] vfio: cleanup and refactor In-Reply-To: References: To: test-report@dpdk.org From: checkpatch@dpdk.org Cc: Anatoly Burakov Message-Id: <20251114174500.7D2C71261F3@dpdk.org> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 18:45:00 +0100 (CET) X-BeenThere: test-report@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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 Test-Label: checkpatch Test-Status: WARNING http://dpdk.org/patch/158806 _coding style issues_ ERROR:COMPLEX_MACRO: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses #3799: FILE: lib/eal/linux/eal_vfio.h:115: +#define CONTAINER_FOREACH_ACTIVE(cfg) \ + CONTAINER_FOREACH((cfg)) \ + if (((cfg)->active)) BUT SEE: do {} while (0) advice is over-stated in a few situations: The more obvious case is macros, like MODULE_PARM_DESC, invoked at file-scope, where C disallows code (it must be in functions). See $exceptions if you have one to add by name. More troublesome is declarative macros used at top of new scope, like DECLARE_PER_CPU. These might just compile with a do-while-0 wrapper, but would be incorrect. Most of these are handled by detecting struct,union,etc declaration primitives in $exceptions. Theres also macros called inside an if (block), which "return" an expression. These cannot do-while, and need a ({}) wrapper. Enjoy this qualification while we work to improve our heuristics. ERROR:COMPLEX_MACRO: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses #3808: FILE: lib/eal/linux/eal_vfio.h:124: +#define GROUP_FOREACH_ACTIVE(cfg, grp) \ + GROUP_FOREACH((cfg), (grp)) \ + if ((grp)->active) BUT SEE: do {} while (0) advice is over-stated in a few situations: The more obvious case is macros, like MODULE_PARM_DESC, invoked at file-scope, where C disallows code (it must be in functions). See $exceptions if you have one to add by name. More troublesome is declarative macros used at top of new scope, like DECLARE_PER_CPU. These might just compile with a do-while-0 wrapper, but would be incorrect. Most of these are handled by detecting struct,union,etc declaration primitives in $exceptions. Theres also macros called inside an if (block), which "return" an expression. These cannot do-while, and need a ({}) wrapper. Enjoy this qualification while we work to improve our heuristics. ERROR:COMPLEX_MACRO: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses #3822: FILE: lib/eal/linux/eal_vfio.h:133: +#define DEVICE_FOREACH_ACTIVE(cfg, dev) \ + DEVICE_FOREACH((cfg), (dev)) \ + if ((dev)->active) BUT SEE: do {} while (0) advice is over-stated in a few situations: The more obvious case is macros, like MODULE_PARM_DESC, invoked at file-scope, where C disallows code (it must be in functions). See $exceptions if you have one to add by name. More troublesome is declarative macros used at top of new scope, like DECLARE_PER_CPU. These might just compile with a do-while-0 wrapper, but would be incorrect. Most of these are handled by detecting struct,union,etc declaration primitives in $exceptions. Theres also macros called inside an if (block), which "return" an expression. These cannot do-while, and need a ({}) wrapper. Enjoy this qualification while we work to improve our heuristics. total: 3 errors, 0 warnings, 4704 lines checked