Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] checkpatch: adapt some tests to QEMU

[Peter Maydell]

On 17 September 2015 at 17:00, Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
> On 17/09/2015 16:24, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Can we revert this one, please? Checkpatch now warns about constructs
>> like
>>   typedef struct MyDevice {
>>       DeviceState parent;
>>
>>       int reg0, reg1, reg2;
>>   } MyDevice;
>
> It's interesting that qom/object.h documents this and start like:
>
> typedef struct ObjectClass ObjectClass;
> typedef struct Object Object;
>
> typedef struct TypeInfo TypeInfo;
>
> typedef struct InterfaceClass InterfaceClass;
> typedef struct InterfaceInfo InterfaceInfo;
>
> I have a patch to flag widely-disrespected rules that we still want to
> encourage in patches.  Would you agree with filing these typedefs under
> this category?

No, I think that having a separate typedef is worse. The
only exceptions are (a) when you need it to be separate because
you need to use the type within the struct itself (or some
similar dependency loop) (b) when you want to put the typedef
in include/qemu/typedefs.h.

I really don't see any need to suddenly outlaw something
that's been accepted as standard good QEMU style for a
long time.

(You could make checkpatch warn about
  typedef struct Foo
  {
      stuff;
  } Foo;

if you like, the newline before the '{' is out of line with our
usual approach.)

thanks
-- PMM