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

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

On 22/11/22 09:58, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Thomas Huth <thuth at redhat.com> writes:
> 
>> On 21/11/2022 17.32, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd at linaro.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 21/11/22 15:36, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 14:03, Markus Armbruster <armbru at 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 at 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 :)