Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 2/4] xen: introduce a C99 headers check

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 3 Apr 2017, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 31.03.17 at 21:15, <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Introduce a C99 headers check, for non-ANSI compliant headers: 9pfs.h
> > and pvcalls.h.
> > 
> > In addition to the usual -include stdint.h, also add -include string.h
> > to the C99 check to get the declaration of memcpy and size_t.
> > 
> > For the same reason, also add -include cstring to the C++ check when
> > necessary.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: JBeulich@xxxxxxxx 
> > CC: konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx 
> > ---
> >  .gitignore           |  3 +--
> >  xen/include/Makefile | 30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
> >  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
> > index 443b12a..0265c1e 100644
> > --- a/.gitignore
> > +++ b/.gitignore
> > @@ -273,8 +273,7 @@ xen/arch/*/efi/boot.c
> >  xen/arch/*/efi/compat.c
> >  xen/arch/*/efi/efi.h
> >  xen/arch/*/efi/runtime.c
> > -xen/include/headers.chk
> > -xen/include/headers++.chk
> > +xen/include/headers*.chk
> >  xen/include/asm
> >  xen/include/asm-*/asm-offsets.h
> >  xen/include/asm-x86/cpuid-autogen.h
> > diff --git a/xen/include/Makefile b/xen/include/Makefile
> > index aca7f20..fd57ce4 100644
> > --- a/xen/include/Makefile
> > +++ b/xen/include/Makefile
> > @@ -90,11 +90,12 @@ compat/xlat.h: $(addprefix compat/.xlat/,$(xlat-y)) 
> > Makefile
> >  
> >  ifeq ($(XEN_TARGET_ARCH),$(XEN_COMPILE_ARCH))
> >  
> > -all: headers.chk headers++.chk
> > +all: headers.chk headers99.chk headers++.chk
> >  
> >  PUBLIC_HEADERS := $(filter-out public/arch-% public/dom0_ops.h, $(wildcard 
> > public/*.h public/*/*.h) $(public-y))
> >  
> > -PUBLIC_ANSI_HEADERS := $(filter-out public/%ctl.h public/xsm/% 
> > public/%hvm/save.h, $(PUBLIC_HEADERS))
> > +PUBLIC_C99_HEADERS :=
> > +PUBLIC_ANSI_HEADERS := $(filter-out public/%ctl.h public/xsm/% 
> > public/%hvm/save.h $(PUBLIC_C99_HEADERS), $(PUBLIC_HEADERS))
> >  
> >  headers.chk: $(PUBLIC_ANSI_HEADERS) Makefile
> >     for i in $(filter %.h,$^); do \
> > @@ -104,16 +105,21 @@ headers.chk: $(PUBLIC_ANSI_HEADERS) Makefile
> >     done >$@.new
> >     mv $@.new $@
> >  
> > +headers99.chk: $(PUBLIC_C99_HEADERS) Makefile
> > +   rm -f $@.new
> > +   $(foreach i, $(filter %.h,$^), $(CC) -x c -std=c99 -Wall -Werror    \
> > +       -include stdint.h $(foreach j, $($(i)-prereq), -include $(j).h) \
> > +       -S -o /dev/null $(i) || exit $$?; echo $(i) >> $@.new;)
> 
> I would have wished that you formatted this along the lines of
> the C++ rule below (|| first on its line, aligned with the beginning
> of the command). But anyway - I can live with it here, but ...
> 
> > +   mv $@.new $@
> > +
> >  headers++.chk: $(PUBLIC_HEADERS) Makefile
> > -   if $(CXX) -v >/dev/null 2>&1; then \
> > -       for i in $(filter %.h,$^); do \
> > -           echo '#include "'$$i'"' \
> > -           | $(CXX) -x c++ -std=gnu++98 -Wall -Werror -D__XEN_TOOLS__ \
> > -             -include stdint.h -include public/xen.h -S -o /dev/null - \
> > -           || exit 1; \
> > -           echo $$i; \
> > -       done ; \
> > -   fi >$@.new
> > +   rm -f $@.new
> > +   $(CXX) -v >/dev/null 2>&1 || exit 0;                               \
> > +   $(foreach i, $(filter %.h,$^), echo "#include "\"$(i)\"            \
> > +       |$(CXX) -x c++ -std=gnu++98 -Wall -Werror -D__XEN_TOOLS__      \
> > +       -include stdint.h -include public/xen.h                        \
> > +       $(foreach j, $($(i)-prereq), -include c$(j)) -S -o /dev/null - \
> > +       || exit $$?; echo $(i) >> $@.new;)
> 
> ... indentation still doesn't match how it was originally (including,
> as mentioned above as well, aligning the start of the command
> with | and || ) and there's a blank missing after | . Of course I'm
> fine with you fixing this upon commit, if no other need arises for
> a v9, so on that basis with those adjustments
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>

Turns out that I have a small fix to patch #1 to do, so I'll resend the
series once again with your comments and reviewed-by. I hope I
interpreted your alignment asks correctly.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel