Re: [PATCH] cleanup: Tweak and re-run return_directly.cocci

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

On 22/11/22 09:58, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > On 21/11/2022 17.32, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org> writes:
> > >
> > > > On 21/11/22 15:36, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 14:03, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Tweak the semantic patch to drop redundant parenthesis around the
> > > > > > return expression.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Coccinelle drops comments in hw/rdma/vmw/pvrdma_cmd.c; restored
> > > > > > manually.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Coccinelle messes up vmdk_co_create(), not sure why.  Transformed
> > > > > > manually.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Line breaks in target/avr/cpu.h and hw/rdma/vmw/pvrdma_cmd.c tidied up
> > > > > > manually.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Whitespace in fuse_reply_iov() tidied up manually.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > checkpatch.pl complains "return of an errno should typically be -ve"
> > > > > > two times for hw/9pfs/9p-synth.c.  Preexisting, the patch merely makes
> > > > > > it visible to checkpatch.pl.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > checkpatch.pl complains "return is not a function, parentheses are not
> > > > > > required" three times for target/mips/tcg/dsp_helper.c.  False
> > > > > > positives.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > >     .../user/ase/msa/bit-count/test_msa_nloc_b.c  |   9 +-
> > > > > >     .../user/ase/msa/bit-count/test_msa_nloc_d.c  |   9 +-
> > > > > [snip long list of other mips test files]
> > > > >
> > > > > >     328 files changed, 989 insertions(+), 2099 deletions(-)
> > > > > This patch seems to almost entirely be huge because of these
> > > > > mips test case files. Are they specific to QEMU or are they
> > > > > effectively a 3rd-party import that it doesn't make sense
> > > > > to make local changes to?
> > > >
> > > > They are imported and will unlikely be modified.
> > >
> > > Not obvious to me from git-log.
> > >
> > > Should I drop the changes to tests/tcg/mips/?
> >
> > I'd say yes. At least move them to a separate patch.
>
> Possible status of tests/tcg/mips/:
>
> 1. Imported, should not be modified
>
>     Drop from the patch.
>
> 2. Not imported, should be modified
>
> 2a. To be reviewed separately from the remainder of the patch
>
>      Split off.
>
> 2b. Likewise, but nobody will care to review, realistically
>
>      Split off and merge anyway, or drop.  I'd go for the latter.
>
> 2c. To be reviewed together with the remainder of the patch
>
>      Keep as is.
>
> Which one is it?

"1. Imported, should not be modified" please :)