Message ID | 20190118165050.22270-1-peter.maydell@linaro.org |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [v2] checkpatch: Don't emit spurious warnings about block comments | expand |
On 1/18/19 10:50 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > In checkpatch we attempt to check for and warn about > block comments which start with /* or /** followed by a > non-blank. Unfortunately a bug in the regex meant that > we would incorrectly warn about comments starting with > "/**" with no following text: > > git show 9813dc6ac3954d58ba16b3920556f106f97e1c67|./scripts/checkpatch.pl - > WARNING: Block comments use a leading /* on a separate line > #34: FILE: tests/libqtest.h:233: > +/** > > The sequence "/\*\*?" was intended to match either "/*" or "/**", > but Perl's semantics for '?' allow it to backtrack and try the > "matches 0 chars" option if the "matches 1 char" choice leads to > a failure of the rest of the regex to match. Switch to "/\*\*?+" > which uses what perlre(1) calls the "possessive" quantifier form: > this means that if it matches the "/**" string it will not later > backtrack to matching just the "/*" prefix. > > The other end of the regex is also wrong: it is attempting > to check for "/* or /** followed by something that isn't > just whitespace", but [ \t]*.+[ \t]* will match on pure > whitespace. This is less significant but means that a line > with just a comment-starter followed by trailing whitespace > will generate an incorrect warning about block comment style > as well as the correct error about trailing whitespace which > a different checkpatch test emits. > Fixes: 8c06fbdf36bf4d4d486116200248730887a4d7d6 > Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > Reported-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> > --- > # Block comments use /* on a line of its own > if ($rawline !~ m@^\+.*/\*.*\*/[ \t]*$@ && #inline /*...*/ > - $rawline =~ m@^\+.*/\*\*?[ \t]*.+[ \t]*$@) { # /* or /** non-blank > + $rawline =~ m@^\+.*/\*\*?+[ \t]*[^ \t]@) { # /* or /** non-blank Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 17:06, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 1/18/19 10:50 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > > In checkpatch we attempt to check for and warn about > > block comments which start with /* or /** followed by a > > non-blank. Unfortunately a bug in the regex meant that > > we would incorrectly warn about comments starting with > > "/**" with no following text: > > > > git show 9813dc6ac3954d58ba16b3920556f106f97e1c67|./scripts/checkpatch.pl - > > WARNING: Block comments use a leading /* on a separate line > > #34: FILE: tests/libqtest.h:233: > > +/** > > > > The sequence "/\*\*?" was intended to match either "/*" or "/**", > > but Perl's semantics for '?' allow it to backtrack and try the > > "matches 0 chars" option if the "matches 1 char" choice leads to > > a failure of the rest of the regex to match. Switch to "/\*\*?+" > > which uses what perlre(1) calls the "possessive" quantifier form: > > this means that if it matches the "/**" string it will not later > > backtrack to matching just the "/*" prefix. > > > > The other end of the regex is also wrong: it is attempting > > to check for "/* or /** followed by something that isn't > > just whitespace", but [ \t]*.+[ \t]* will match on pure > > whitespace. This is less significant but means that a line > > with just a comment-starter followed by trailing whitespace > > will generate an incorrect warning about block comment style > > as well as the correct error about trailing whitespace which > > a different checkpatch test emits. > > > > Fixes: 8c06fbdf36bf4d4d486116200248730887a4d7d6 > > > Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > Reported-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> > > --- > > > # Block comments use /* on a line of its own > > if ($rawline !~ m@^\+.*/\*.*\*/[ \t]*$@ && #inline /*...*/ > > - $rawline =~ m@^\+.*/\*\*?[ \t]*.+[ \t]*$@) { # /* or /** non-blank > > + $rawline =~ m@^\+.*/\*\*?+[ \t]*[^ \t]@) { # /* or /** non-blank > > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Thanks. I'll take this via target-arm.next, just for convenience... -- PMM
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index d10dddf1be4..88682cb0a9f 100755 --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl @@ -1624,7 +1624,7 @@ sub process { # Block comments use /* on a line of its own if ($rawline !~ m@^\+.*/\*.*\*/[ \t]*$@ && #inline /*...*/ - $rawline =~ m@^\+.*/\*\*?[ \t]*.+[ \t]*$@) { # /* or /** non-blank + $rawline =~ m@^\+.*/\*\*?+[ \t]*[^ \t]@) { # /* or /** non-blank WARN("Block comments use a leading /* on a separate line\n" . $herecurr); }
In checkpatch we attempt to check for and warn about block comments which start with /* or /** followed by a non-blank. Unfortunately a bug in the regex meant that we would incorrectly warn about comments starting with "/**" with no following text: git show 9813dc6ac3954d58ba16b3920556f106f97e1c67|./scripts/checkpatch.pl - WARNING: Block comments use a leading /* on a separate line #34: FILE: tests/libqtest.h:233: +/** The sequence "/\*\*?" was intended to match either "/*" or "/**", but Perl's semantics for '?' allow it to backtrack and try the "matches 0 chars" option if the "matches 1 char" choice leads to a failure of the rest of the regex to match. Switch to "/\*\*?+" which uses what perlre(1) calls the "possessive" quantifier form: this means that if it matches the "/**" string it will not later backtrack to matching just the "/*" prefix. The other end of the regex is also wrong: it is attempting to check for "/* or /** followed by something that isn't just whitespace", but [ \t]*.+[ \t]* will match on pure whitespace. This is less significant but means that a line with just a comment-starter followed by trailing whitespace will generate an incorrect warning about block comment style as well as the correct error about trailing whitespace which a different checkpatch test emits. Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> Reported-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> --- This comment check is unique to QEMU checkpatch so the bugs don't exist in the Linux version. v1->v2 changes: Add the fix to the other end of the regex pointed out by Eric, so that we don't emit spurious warnings for block comment starters with trailing whitespace. --- scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)