From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S941288AbdAGJiT (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jan 2017 04:38:19 -0500 Received: from 92-243-34-74.adsl.nanet.at ([92.243.34.74]:45949 "EHLO mail.osadl.at" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S941255AbdAGJhq (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jan 2017 04:37:46 -0500 Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2017 09:37:22 +0000 From: Nicholas Mc Guire To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Nicholas Mc Guire , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Joe Perches , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86, boot: add missing declaration of string functions Message-ID: <20170107093722.GA19544@osadl.at> References: <1482487296-5064-1-git-send-email-hofrat@osadl.org> <20170105080208.GC2098@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170105080208.GC2098@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Nicholas Mc Guire 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 > > --- > > > > 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 is obsolete.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 > > #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: 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. thx! hofrat