Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 2 Aug 2012 17:23:22 +0100 | | From | Andy Whitcroft <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add control statement test to SINGLE_STATEMENT_DO_WHILE_MACRO |
| |
On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 08:26:53AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> The patch below is tested with: > $ cat t.c > > #define bar_1(foo) \ > if (foo) \ > baz(); \ > > #define bar_2(foo) \ > do { \ > if (foo) \ > baz(); \ > } while (0) > > #define bar_3(foo) \ > do { \ > baz(); \ > } while (0) > > #define bar_4(foo) \ > do { \ > baz(); \ > } while (0); > > #define bar_5(foo) \ > do { \ > while (foo) \ > baz(); \ > } while (0) > > #define bar_6(foo) \ > do { \ > switch (foo) { \ > case 1: \ > baz(); \ > } \ > } while (0) > > $ > > So perhaps... > > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 3 ++- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > index 913d6bd..ca05ba2 100755 > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > @@ -3016,7 +3016,8 @@ sub process { > $herectx .= raw_line($linenr, $n) . "\n"; > } > > - if (($stmts =~ tr/;/;/) == 1) { > + if (($stmts =~ tr/;/;/) == 1 && > + $stmts !~ /^\s*(if|while|for|switch)\b/) { > WARN("SINGLE_STATEMENT_DO_WHILE_MACRO", > "Single statement macros should not use a do {} while (0) loop\n" . "$herectx"); > } > >
Looks reasonable enough.
Acked-by: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
-apw
|  |