Hi Mentors,
I am Menna, Outreachy applicant and I work on my clean-up patches.
Is it Okay to work on this error reported by checkpatch script?
drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c
--------------------------------------
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#256: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:256:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_FREQ(0, 1, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write, AD9832_FREQ1HM);
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#257: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:257:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_FREQSYMBOL(0, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write,
AD9832_FREQ_SYM);
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#260: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:260:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_PHASE(0, 0, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write, AD9832_PHASE0H);
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#261: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:261:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_PHASE(0, 1, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write, AD9832_PHASE1H);
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#262: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:262:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_PHASE(0, 2, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write, AD9832_PHASE2H);
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#263: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:263:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_PHASE(0, 3, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write, AD9832_PHASE3H);
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#264: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:264:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_PHASESYMBOL(0, 0200, NULL,
+ ad9832_write, AD9832_PHASE_SYM);
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#268: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:268:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_PINCONTROL_EN(0, 0200, NULL,
+ ad9832_write, AD9832_PINCTRL_EN);
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
#270: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:270:
+static IIO_DEV_ATTR_OUT_ENABLE(0, 0200, NULL,
+ ad9832_write, AD9832_OUTPUT_EN);
total: 9 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 462 lines checked
Thanks in advance,
Menna
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 03:17:28PM +0200, Menna Mahmoud wrote:
> Hi Mentors,
>
>
> I am Menna, Outreachy applicant and I work on my clean-up patches.
>
> Is it Okay to work on this error reported by checkpatch script?
>
>
> drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c
> --------------------------------------
> ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
> #256: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:256:
> +static IIO_DEV_ATTR_FREQ(0, 1, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write, AD9832_FREQ1HM);
What??? Is it complaining about the 0200? That is octal. Why is
checkpatch complaining about this? Am I wrong? Maybe I am misreading.
I could investigate, but I am leaving that task to you. It may be that
checkpatch has a problem and you can fix that instead.
regards,
dan carpenter
On 3/15/23 07:03, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 03:17:28PM +0200, Menna Mahmoud wrote:
>> Hi Mentors,
>>
>>
>> I am Menna, Outreachy applicant and I work on my clean-up patches.
>>
>> Is it Okay to work on this error reported by checkpatch script?
>>
>>
>> drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c
>> --------------------------------------
>> ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
>> #256: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:256:
>> +static IIO_DEV_ATTR_FREQ(0, 1, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write, AD9832_FREQ1HM);
>
> What??? Is it complaining about the 0200? That is octal. Why is
> checkpatch complaining about this? Am I wrong? Maybe I am misreading.
>
> I could investigate, but I am leaving that task to you. It may be that
> checkpatch has a problem and you can fix that instead.
>
Yes, checkpatch seems to be confused here.
--
~Randy
On 3/15/23 12:24, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
> On 3/15/23 07:03, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 03:17:28PM +0200, Menna Mahmoud wrote:
>>> Hi Mentors,
>>>
>>>
>>> I am Menna, Outreachy applicant and I work on my clean-up patches.
>>>
>>> Is it Okay to work on this error reported by checkpatch script?
>>>
>>>
>>> drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
>>> #256: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:256:
>>> +static IIO_DEV_ATTR_FREQ(0, 1, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write, AD9832_FREQ1HM);
>> What??? Is it complaining about the 0200? That is octal. Why is
>> checkpatch complaining about this? Am I wrong? Maybe I am misreading.
>>
>> I could investigate, but I am leaving that task to you. It may be that
>> checkpatch has a problem and you can fix that instead.
>>
> Yes, checkpatch seems to be confused here.
It seems to make an assumption that everything starting with
IIO_DEV_ATTR_ has the mode field at the same position. Which is not the
case.
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/scripts/checkpatch.pl#L798
Still a good target to get this fixed as part of a outreachy task.
On ١٥/٣/٢٠٢٣ ٢٢:٠٩, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 3/15/23 12:24, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>
>> On 3/15/23 07:03, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 03:17:28PM +0200, Menna Mahmoud wrote:
>>>> Hi Mentors,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am Menna, Outreachy applicant and I work on my clean-up patches.
>>>>
>>>> Is it Okay to work on this error reported by checkpatch script?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c
>>>> --------------------------------------
>>>> ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
>>>> #256: FILE: drivers/staging/iio/frequency/ad9832.c:256:
>>>> +static IIO_DEV_ATTR_FREQ(0, 1, 0200, NULL, ad9832_write,
>>>> AD9832_FREQ1HM);
>>> What??? Is it complaining about the 0200? That is octal. Why is
>>> checkpatch complaining about this? Am I wrong? Maybe I am misreading.
>>>
>>> I could investigate, but I am leaving that task to you. It may be that
>>> checkpatch has a problem and you can fix that instead.
>>>
>> Yes, checkpatch seems to be confused here.
> It seems to make an assumption that everything starting with
> IIO_DEV_ATTR_ has the mode field at the same position. Which is not
> the case.
>
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/scripts/checkpatch.pl#L798
>
> Still a good target to get this fixed as part of a outreachy task.
I see, Thanks Randy and Lars-Peter for your help I will try check this.