From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B908BC43460 for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 09:17:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BBF16124C for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 09:17:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231409AbhETJTF (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 May 2021 05:19:05 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42096 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230478AbhETJTE (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 May 2021 05:19:04 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3005C061574; Thu, 20 May 2021 02:17:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id w7so5469662lji.6; Thu, 20 May 2021 02:17:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=q5NNCzIDPxqo067q//hI06QgTQ23wAipeV7AqsspEK8=; b=dMifFK5mrbM1Aw7kDsK+Jze9zdTq/tR03g+XfLe9dj0vGZWFlJZ5I6cO3SH8ZxIpK4 BlL1K81BNi6yCiJ8kMxf1iWv84QmbdXSor1jjZB9BQUWSB9Eo0hvyfmNnLehYDUjsX4A n1vAw1n8c56zTAQzKtULbGBYm/IE6e6ZZXIMvs3xe8xEtESi4ZDcDT8OSE+eUyFCFEaX nXPMitLkndG5KIAdZ5mfbG0tTDrjvgvTQow29im9268oVqNi/y3ECdVGdx+b1IJKHV8f bhWKtdxw6uGU5Wu/P1+qAmrTvU/kfhTkY6yCF6PQkz5s/JqhOgeclwYhX4GLKXljBWO6 pPrw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=q5NNCzIDPxqo067q//hI06QgTQ23wAipeV7AqsspEK8=; b=jf71rP3xdGM198jAAcFfgRVPy6ueIhhMKbr3dQ87CgrCZWNrP2gdlIVEwMflDvdhPT PurtMQcG6YLtImgsJ0yb0Oq9zByRSwiU49XHxrsQEtgVk/yMRMYH5/usf9GXBhej7246 PO6pbUpaXYPDsVFLg/ldfxGvPvnGP3nCW0/XMrT4v9ipIg3r+jZlmX1/N2l3+nQyY8Ut yiWb3KZr6wStHIER4NWIroDN8gDRdup291oUa1P5CG1+BXYII5etsSRQlw6XgNCI5BXM Qwj6yMI5K8Ba9OIJ7i70SCGelxBqfhYraAFEa0WKUfnFOf+IYMl8Af5Zv0CCM2c6VoFl 2uTA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533+3PmtpS0H7A9AEzDj6ovnpb9emL5LEFD3KauQTHWHY9cqUjix FzMw7uiUDeKFvaMcIz9QS8aHWGx+wPikn4Md+WNOOiooBvWmjpAy X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz4WFFNBnmNgryAJqy1rEQkzpS2J5xI4uNUIVb52y/tSHKTrUi6aO0f+Xw7ZYW8JsoC08GKWLqwhdT2s0mVxSs= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8903:: with SMTP id d3mr2359627lji.373.1621502261149; Thu, 20 May 2021 02:17:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210520015704.489737-1-andrew@aj.id.au> In-Reply-To: From: Dwaipayan Ray Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 14:47:28 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: checkpatch: Tweak BIT() macro include To: Andrew Jeffery Cc: Lukas Bulwahn , Linux Doc Mailing List , Joe Perches , Jonathan Corbet , Linux Kernel Mailing List , openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org, Jiri Slaby Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 12:55 PM Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > > > On Thu, 20 May 2021, at 16:28, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: > > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 3:57 AM Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > > > > > While include/linux/bitops.h brings in the BIT() macro, it was moved to > > > include/linux/bits.h in [1]. Since [1] BIT() has moved again into > > > include/vdso/bits.h via [2]. > > > > > > I think the move to the vDSO header can be considered a implementation > > > detail, so for now update the checkpatch documentation to recommend use > > > of include/linux/bits.h. > > > > > > [1] commit 8bd9cb51daac ("locking/atomics, asm-generic: Move some macros from to a new file") > > > [2] commit 3945ff37d2f4 ("linux/bits.h: Extract common header for vDSO") > > > > > > Cc: Jiri Slaby > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery > > > > Looks sound to me. > > > > I would prefer a bit of word-smithing the commit message by just > > removing the references: > > > > So: > > > > > While include/linux/bitops.h brings in the BIT() macro, it was moved to > > > include/linux/bits.h in commit 8bd9cb51daac ("locking/atomics, asm-generic: Move some macros from to a new file"). Since that commit, BIT() has moved again into > > > include/vdso/bits.h via commit 3945ff37d2f4 ("linux/bits.h: Extract common header for vDSO"). > > > > > > I think the move to the vDSO header can be considered a implementation > > > detail, so for now update the checkpatch documentation to recommend use > > > of include/linux/bits.h. > > > > > > > And then drop references [1] and [2]. > > > > Andrew, what do you think? > > I mostly did this because initially I wrapped the commit message and > checkpatch spat out errors when it failed to properly identify the > commit description for [1]. But, leaving the description unwrapped > inline in the text feels untidy as it's just a work-around to dodge a > shortcoming of checkpatch. > > With the reference style the long line moves out of the way and > checkpatch can identify the commit descriptions, at the expense of > complaints about line length instead. But the line length issue was > only a warning and so didn't seem quite so critical. > > While the referencing style is terse I felt it was a reasonable > compromise that didn't involve fixing checkpatch to fix the checkpatch > documentation :/ > Hey, Can you share which wrap around caused the checkpatch errors to be emitted? We can try to fix that. I was able to wrap it without checkpatch complaining. You might consider replacing it with this if you wish? While include/linux/bitops.h brings in the BIT() macro, it was moved to include/linux/bits.h in commit 8bd9cb51daac ("locking/atomics, asm-generic: Move some macros from to a new file"). Since that commit BIT() has moved again into include/vdso/bits.h via commit 3945ff37d2f4 ("linux/bits.h: Extract common header for vDSO"). I think the move to the vDSO header can be considered an implementation detail, so for now update the checkpatch documentation to recommend use of include/linux/bits.h. Thanks, Dwaipayan.