Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1551729 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH RFC] x86, boot: add missing declaration of string functions

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH RFC] x86, boot: add missing declaration of string  functions Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-01-05 09:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH RFC] x86, boot: add missing declaration of string  functions Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@hofr.at> - 2017-01-07 10:40 +0100

#1551729 — Re: [PATCH RFC] x86, boot: add missing declaration of string functions

* Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org> wrote:

> Add the missing declarations of basic string functions to string.h to allow
> a clean build.
> 
> Fixes: commit 5be865661516 ("String-handling functions for the new x86 setup code.")
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
> ---
> 
> sparse issues a set of warnings about missing declarations:
> arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:18:5: warning: symbol 'memcmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:26:5: warning: symbol 'strcmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:42:5: warning: symbol 'strncmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:58:8: warning: symbol 'strnlen' was not declared. Should it be static?
> arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:69:14: warning: symbol 'atou' was not declared. Should it be static?
> arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:99:20: warning: symbol 'simple_strtoull' was not declared. Should it be static?
> arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:128:8: warning: symbol 'strlen' was not declared. Should it be static?
> arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:142:6: warning: symbol 'strstr' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> This patch has one checkpatch warning about the use of simple_strtoul which
> is obsolete. As this is an independent implementation it is not clear if
> the changes made in simple_strtoul -> _kstrtoull might also need to be
> applied here ?
> 
> Patch was compile tested with: x86_64_defconfig
> 
> Patch is against 4.9.0 (localversion-next is next-20161223)
> 
>  arch/x86/boot/string.c |  1 +
>  arch/x86/boot/string.h |  9 +++++++++
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/string.c b/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> index cc3bd58..9e240fc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>  
>  #include <linux/types.h>
>  #include "ctype.h"
> +#include "string.h"
>  
>  int memcmp(const void *s1, const void *s2, size_t len)
>  {
> diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/string.h b/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> index 725e820..f6ee139 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> @@ -18,4 +18,13 @@ int memcmp(const void *s1, const void *s2, size_t len);
>  #define memset(d,c,l) __builtin_memset(d,c,l)
>  #define memcmp	__builtin_memcmp
>  
> +int strcmp(const char *str1, const char *str2);
> +int strncmp(const char *cs, const char *ct, size_t count);
> +size_t strlen(const char *s);
> +char *strstr(const char *s1, const char *s2);
> +size_t strnlen(const char *s, size_t maxlen);
> +unsigned int atou(const char *s);
> +unsigned long long simple_strtoull(const char *cp,
> +				    char **endp, unsigned int base);

Looks good to me, but please also mark them 'extern' to highlight the API 
declarations like the rest of the kernel does - such as kernel.h which has
the kernel's simple_strtoull() declaration, etc.

It's not required syntactically, but it's a good stylistic principle to keep 
external APIs organized.

Thanks,

	Ingo

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1553628

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org> wrote:
> 
> > Add the missing declarations of basic string functions to string.h to allow
> > a clean build.
> > 
> > Fixes: commit 5be865661516 ("String-handling functions for the new x86 setup code.")
> > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
> > ---
> > 
> > sparse issues a set of warnings about missing declarations:
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:18:5: warning: symbol 'memcmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:26:5: warning: symbol 'strcmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:42:5: warning: symbol 'strncmp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:58:8: warning: symbol 'strnlen' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:69:14: warning: symbol 'atou' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:99:20: warning: symbol 'simple_strtoull' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:128:8: warning: symbol 'strlen' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > arch/x86/purgatory/../boot/string.c:142:6: warning: symbol 'strstr' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > 
> > This patch has one checkpatch warning about the use of simple_strtoul which
> > is obsolete. As this is an independent implementation it is not clear if
> > the changes made in simple_strtoul -> _kstrtoull might also need to be
> > applied here ?
> > 
> > Patch was compile tested with: x86_64_defconfig
> > 
> > Patch is against 4.9.0 (localversion-next is next-20161223)
> > 
> >  arch/x86/boot/string.c |  1 +
> >  arch/x86/boot/string.h |  9 +++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/string.c b/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> > index cc3bd58..9e240fc 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/string.c
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >  
> >  #include <linux/types.h>
> >  #include "ctype.h"
> > +#include "string.h"
> >  
> >  int memcmp(const void *s1, const void *s2, size_t len)
> >  {
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/string.h b/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> > index 725e820..f6ee139 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/string.h
> > @@ -18,4 +18,13 @@ int memcmp(const void *s1, const void *s2, size_t len);
> >  #define memset(d,c,l) __builtin_memset(d,c,l)
> >  #define memcmp	__builtin_memcmp
> >  
> > +int strcmp(const char *str1, const char *str2);
> > +int strncmp(const char *cs, const char *ct, size_t count);
> > +size_t strlen(const char *s);
> > +char *strstr(const char *s1, const char *s2);
> > +size_t strnlen(const char *s, size_t maxlen);
> > +unsigned int atou(const char *s);
> > +unsigned long long simple_strtoull(const char *cp,
> > +				    char **endp, unsigned int base);
> 
> Looks good to me, but please also mark them 'extern' to highlight the API 
> declarations like the rest of the kernel does - such as kernel.h which has
> the kernel's simple_strtoull() declaration, etc.
> 
> It's not required syntactically, but it's a good stylistic principle to keep 
> external APIs organized.
>
thanks - added the externs and resent as V2 

while this does looks consistent with other kernel header files now
checkpatch --strict will issue CHECK requests of the form:
  "CHECK: extern prototypes should be avoided in .h files"
so I just wonder if this CHECK is actually consistent with coding practice ?
the argument in commit 70dc8a48357c ("checkpatch: warn when using extern with function prototypes in .h files")
being:

<snip>
    Using the extern keyword on function prototypes is superfluous visual
    noise so suggest removing it.
    
    Using extern can cause unnecessary line wrapping at 80 columns and
    unnecessarily long multi-line function prototypes.
<anip>

thx!
hofrat 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web