Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-69347-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 22:05:30 +0100
From: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
To: Eric Chan <ericchancf@google.com>
Cc: paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] riscv/barrier: Resolve checkpatch.pl error
Message-ID: <Zc/OGnjVKcCuKNA5@andrea>
References: <20240213223810.2595804-1-ericchancf@google.com>
 <20240213224000.2597959-1-ericchancf@google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240213224000.2597959-1-ericchancf@google.com>

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 10:40:00PM +0000, Eric Chan wrote:
> The past form of RISCV_FENCE would cause checkpatch.pl to issue
> error messages, the example is as follows:
> ERROR: space required after that ',' (ctx:VxV)
> +#define __atomic_acquire_fence()       RISCV_FENCE(r,rw)

Not the "best" example, according to Samuel's feedback and the diff
below.  How about something like:

ERROR: space required after that ',' (ctx:VxV)
#10: FILE: arch/riscv/include/asm/barrier.h:28:
+#define __smp_mb()	RISCV_FENCE(rw,rw)


> -#define __mb()		RISCV_FENCE(iorw,iorw)
> -#define __rmb()		RISCV_FENCE(ir,ir)
> -#define __wmb()		RISCV_FENCE(ow,ow)
> +#define __mb()		RISCV_FENCE(iorw, iorw)
> +#define __rmb()		RISCV_FENCE(ir, ir)
> +#define __wmb()		RISCV_FENCE(ow, ow)

This would go away per my comment to 1/4.


From a less technical viewpoint and FYI, an unwritten rule of "working
with the Linux kernel community" is:

  Don't forget to keep people who spent time reviewing, or providing
  feedback to, your patch in the loop/in Cc: in your next iterations;
  they might be the only people who will be able to provide feedback
  /suggestions/help in your future life.

;-)

  Andrea