On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 02:27:19AM +0000, Gonglei (Arei) wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:48:14PM +0800, Gonglei wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_algs.c
> > b/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_algs.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..08b077f
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_algs.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,518 @@
> > > + /* Algorithms supported by virtio crypto device
> > > +  *
> > > +  * Authors: Gonglei <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>
> > > +  *
> > > +  * Copyright 2016 HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.
> > > +  *
> > > +  * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > > +  * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> > > +  * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> > > +  * (at your option) any later version.
> > > +  *
> > > +  * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> > > +  * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> > > +  * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> > > +  * GNU General Public License for more details.
> > > +  *
> > > +  * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> > > +  * along with this program; if not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
> > > +  */
> > > +
> > > +#include <linux/scatterlist.h>
> > > +#include <crypto/algapi.h>
> > > +#include <linux/err.h>
> > > +#include <crypto/scatterwalk.h>
> > > +#include <linux/atomic.h>
> > > +
> > > +#include <uapi/linux/virtio_crypto.h>
> > > +#include "virtio_crypto_common.h"
> > > +
> > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(algs_lock);
> > 
> > Did you run checkpatch.pl?  I think it encourages you to document what
> > the lock protects.
> > 
> Sure. Basically I run checkpatch.py each time. :)
> 
> # ./scripts/checkpatch.pl 0001-crypto-add-virtio-crypto-driver.patch 
> total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 1873 lines checked
> 
> 0001-crypto-add-virtio-crypto-driver.patch has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.

Looks like a bug in checkpatch.pl:

# check for spinlock_t definitions without a comment.
if ($line =~ /^.\s*(struct\s+mutex|spinlock_t)\s+\S+;/ ||
    $line =~ /^.\s*(DEFINE_MUTEX)\s*\(/) {
        my $which = $1;
        if (!ctx_has_comment($first_line, $linenr)) {
                CHK("UNCOMMENTED_DEFINITION",
                    "$1 definition without comment\n" . $herecurr);
        }
}

Since your mutex definition has the 'static' keyword in front of it
checkpatch.pl misses it!

Andy: Is this checkpatch.pl behavior intentional?

Stefan