From: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@hofr.at>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86, boot: add missing declaration of string functions
Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 09:37:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170107093722.GA19544@osadl.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170105080208.GC2098@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org> wrote:
>
> > Add the missing declarations of basic string functions to string.h to allow
> > a clean build.
> >
> > Fixes: commit 5be865661516 ("String-handling functions for the new x86 setup code.")
> > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
> > ---
> >
> > sparse issues a set of warnings about missing declarations:
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:18:5: warning: symbol 'memcmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:26:5: warning: symbol 'strcmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:42:5: warning: symbol 'strncmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:58:8: warning: symbol 'strnlen' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:69:14: warning: symbol 'atou' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:99:20: warning: symbol 'simple_strtoull' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:128:8: warning: symbol 'strlen' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:142:6: warning: symbol 'strstr' was not declared. Should it be static?
> >
> > This patch has one checkpatch warning about the use of simple_strtoul which
> > is obsolete. As this is an independent implementation it is not clear if
> > the changes made in simple_strtoul -> _kstrtoull might also need to be
> > applied here ?
> >
> > Patch was compile tested with: x86_64_defconfig
> >
> > Patch is against 4.9.0 (localversion-next is next-20161223)
> >
> > arch/x86/boot/string.c | 1 +
> > arch/x86/boot/string.h | 9 +++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/string.c b/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> > index cc3bd58..9e240fc 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >
> > #include <linux/types.h>
> > #include "ctype.h"
> > +#include "string.h"
> >
> > int memcmp(const void *s1, const void *s2, size_t len)
> > {
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/string.h b/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> > index 725e820..f6ee139 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> > @@ -18,4 +18,13 @@ int memcmp(const void *s1, const void *s2, size_t len);
> > #define memset(d,c,l) __builtin_memset(d,c,l)
> > #define memcmp __builtin_memcmp
> >
> > +int strcmp(const char *str1, const char *str2);
> > +int strncmp(const char *cs, const char *ct, size_t count);
> > +size_t strlen(const char *s);
> > +char *strstr(const char *s1, const char *s2);
> > +size_t strnlen(const char *s, size_t maxlen);
> > +unsigned int atou(const char *s);
> > +unsigned long long simple_strtoull(const char *cp,
> > + char **endp, unsigned int base);
>
> Looks good to me, but please also mark them 'extern' to highlight the API
> declarations like the rest of the kernel does - such as kernel.h which has
> the kernel's simple_strtoull() declaration, etc.
>
> It's not required syntactically, but it's a good stylistic principle to keep
> external APIs organized.
>
thanks - added the externs and resent as V2
while this does looks consistent with other kernel header files now
checkpatch --strict will issue CHECK requests of the form:
"CHECK: extern prototypes should be avoided in .h files"
so I just wonder if this CHECK is actually consistent with coding practice ?
the argument in commit 70dc8a48357c ("checkpatch: warn when using extern with function prototypes in .h files")
being:
<snip>
Using the extern keyword on function prototypes is superfluous visual
noise so suggest removing it.
Using extern can cause unnecessary line wrapping at 80 columns and
unnecessarily long multi-line function prototypes.
<anip>
thx!
hofrat
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-07 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-23 10:01 [PATCH RFC] x86, boot: add missing declaration of string functions Nicholas Mc Guire
2017-01-05 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-07 9:37 ` Nicholas Mc Guire [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170107093722.GA19544@osadl.at \
--to=der.herr@hofr.at \
--cc=hofrat@osadl.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).