Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Add checkpatch.pl from Linux kernel

[Stuart Brady]

On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 06:46:31PM +0100, Stefan Weil wrote:

> I appreciate that it will be possible to use scripts like this one
> for QEMU, too. Let me just add a small remark.
> 
> QEMU's root directory is already crowded with too many files
> (at least that's my personal opinion).
> 
> Why not use a directory structure similar to Linux and add
> the script to scripts/checkpatch.pl? More scripts will follow,
> e.g. scripts/get_maintainer.pl, and users will know where they
> have to look for these scripts.

I'd agree.  We should probably also have a SubmittingPatches file
which mentions the checkpatch script, and also the developers
certificate of origin (which I assume applies to QEMU, but I've
not actually seen that stated anywhere)...  Linux's document might
be a good starting point for QEMU.

Would you include scripts that are used when building in this
directory?  The scripts that I could find are:

   create_config
   feature_to_c.sh
   hxtool
   qemu-binfmt-conf.sh
   texi2pod.pl

Linux seems to mix both scripts that a user might run directly, and
scripts that are only using when building, which seems wrong to me.

BTW, I notice that qemu-binfmt-conf.sh could do with some cleanup...
e.g. QEMU might be installed somewhere other than /usr/local/bin,
there's the FIXME against MIPS, readability could be improved, and
quite a few targets are missing.  I might have a go at some of this.

Some other suggestions for directories that may make sense:

   sysemu/devices/audio
   sysemu/devices/input
   sysemu/devices/net
   sysemu/devices/serial
   sysemu/devices/storage
   sysemu/devices/video
   sysemu/machines
   sysemu/migration
   targets/x86
   targets/*
   unit-tests

Placing the *-user and *-softmmu directories into one single directory
would also avoid clutter.

Projects using Automake hide their .d files inside a .deps directory,
so perhaps that would be worth considering.

... and I guess 'Virtual Linux.c' doesn't make much sense now. :-)

Either way, placing scripts that users and developers might well need in
a separate directory (perhaps including examples for tun, etc?) reads
like a good idea to my eyes, anyway.

Cheers,
-- 
Stuart Brady