Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 06 Jul 2018 10:00:47 -0700 | From | pheragu@codeauro ... | Subject | Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add exceptions for dsb keyword usage |
| |
On 2018-07-05 22:52, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2018-07-06 at 06:45 +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 02:14:28PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >> > On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 11:19 -0700, Prakruthi Deepak Heragu wrote: >> > > mb() API can relpace the dsb() API in the kernel code. So, dsb() usage >> > > is discouraged. However, there are exceptions when dsb is used in a >> > > variable or a function name. Exceptions are when 'dsb' is prefixed with >> > > class [-_>*\.] and/or suffixed with class [-_\.;]. >> >> This is a really confusing way of describing the match behaviour, and >> doesn't >> explain why this is a big problem. >> >> In C it's either: >> >> dsb() >> dsb(scope) // e.g. dsb(ish) >> >> ... where scope is [a-z]*. >> >> ... which can be matched as something like 'dsb([a-z]*)' if necessary. >> >> > [] >> > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl >> > >> > [] >> > > @@ -5372,6 +5372,12 @@ sub process { >> > > "Avoid line continuations in quoted strings\n" . $herecurr); >> > > } >> > > >> > > +# dsb is too ARMish, and should usually be mb. >> > > + if ($line =~ /[^-_>*\.]\bdsb\b[^-_\.;]/) { >> > > + WARN("ARM_BARRIER", >> > > + "Use of dsb is discouranged: prefer mb.\n" . >> > > + $herecurr); >> > > + } >> > >> > This patch is whitespace damaged with a spelling error. >> > >> > Also, if this is reasonable test, and I don't know >> > that it is, it should be cc'd to the linux-arm list >> > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> > >> > Also, I suggest 2 tests, one for .S files and >> > another for .[ch] files, and this be made specific >> > to arch/arm... files >> > >> > Something like: >> > >> > if ($realfile =~ @^arch/arm@ && >> > ($realfile =~ /\.S$/ && $line =~ /\bdsb\b/) || >> > ($realfile =~ /\.[ch]$/ && $line =~ /\bdsb\s*\(/)) { >> > WARN("ARM_DSB", >> > "Prefer mb over dsb as an ARM memory barrier\n" . $herecurr); >> > } >> > >> > ARM people, is this reasonable? >> >> I don't think this is a big deal today. >> >> For code under arch/{arm,arm64}, it's perfectly reasonable to use dsb. >> >> For code *ouside* of arch/{arm,arm64}, there are a number of cases >> where we >> want to use dsb(), e.g. when dealing with architectural drivers that >> require >> special barriers, or for common code shared across arm and arm64. >> >> It doesn't look like this is a big problem today, anyhow: >> >> [mark@salmiak:~/src/linux]% git grep -w 'dsb(.*)' -- ^arch >> drivers/irqchip/irq-armada-370-xp.c: dsb(); >> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c: dsb(ishst); >> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c: dsb(ishst); >> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c: dsb(sy); >> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c: dsb(sy); >> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c: dsb(sy); >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/cmx270_nand.c: dsb(); >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/cmx270_nand.c: dsb(); >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/cmx270_nand.c: dsb(); >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/cmx270_nand.c: dsb(); >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/cmx270_nand.c: dsb(); >> drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c: dsb(nsh); >> drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c: dsb(nsh); >> drivers/power/reset/arm-versatile-reboot.c: dsb(); >> drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c: dsb(sy); >> drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c: dsb(sy); >> drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/sd.c: //dsb(); /* --- by chhung */ >> drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/sd.c: //dsb(); /* --- by chhung */ >> drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq.h:#define >> dsb(a) >> drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_2835_arm.c: >> dsb(sy); /* data barrier operation */ >> drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c: >> dsb(sy); >> drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.h: do { >> debug_ptr[DEBUG_ ## d] = __LINE__; dsb(sy); } while (0) >> drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.h: do { >> debug_ptr[DEBUG_ ## d] = (v); dsb(sy); } while (0) >> drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.h: do { >> debug_ptr[DEBUG_ ## d]++; dsb(sy); } while (0) >> virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c: dsb(sy); >> virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c: dsb(sy); >> virt/kvm/arm/hyp/vgic-v3-sr.c: dsb(sy); > > Thanks Mark. > > So it seems this shouldn't be applied. Thanks Joe. I appreciate your feedback.
| |