2017-02-25 11:54, Legacy, Allain: > Hi, > I sent a patchset to the to the mailing list last night for which I received > several coding style warnings. Having discovered that I was using an older > version of checkpatch.pl I downloaded the latest and set out to fix the > warnings. The tool is flagging the usage of PRIx64 and PRIu64 in debug logs > as camelcase warnings. I am unsure how to get around this. Looking at other > recent patches in patchwork I see that other patches use these macros without > being flagged as errors.
It is a false positive. PRIx64 and PRIu64 are obviously allowed. The only thing you need to take care is having spaces around. > I thought perhaps that my version of checkpath.pl was newer because I just > downloaded it so I ran it on one of the other patchwork patches to validate > my results. The results that I get are a bit confusing. Running > checkpatches.sh on this patch (http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19766/) > reports no errors, warnings, or checks while this one > (http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/20742/) flags two different kinds of > errors related to the usage of PRIx64. It complains about the camelcase > aspect of it, and it also complains about the lack of space between the > PRIx64 and the concatenated strings at either side. > > Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening? Maybe the difference is because the first one happens in a standard printf function and checkpatch would ignore the specifiers.
