Re: [PATCH] qtests: avoid printing comments before g_test_init()

[Thomas Huth]

On 23/03/2023 19.31, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> wrote:
> > The TAP protocol version line must be the first thing printed on
> > stdout. The migration test failed that requirement in certain
> > scenarios:
> >
> >    # Skipping test: Userfault not available (builtdtime)
> >    TAP version 13
> >    # random seed: R02Sc120c807f11053eb90bfea845ba1e368
> >    1..32
> >    # Start of x86_64 tests
> >    # Start of migration tests
> >    ....
> >
> > The TAP version is printed by g_test_init(), so we need to make
> > sure that any methods which print are run after that.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
> > ---
>
> Reviewed-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
>
> > -    const bool has_kvm = qtest_has_accel("kvm");
> > -    const bool has_uffd = ufd_version_check();
> > -    const char *arch = qtest_get_arch();
> > +    bool has_kvm;
> > +    bool has_uffd;
> > +    const char *arch;
>
> Why don't you move also the declarations of the variables?
> I think that one of the biggest troubles of C is variables that are not
> initialized.
>
> All compilers that we support are C99 or later, so we can do that (and
> we already do in lot of places.)

I think the coding style has been created before we switched to -std=gnu99 
for compiling QEMU, so a lot of GCCs were still using C89 by default?

> And yeap, I know that CodingStyle says otherwise, but I think that what
> is wrong is CodingStyle.
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-02/msg03836.html

Please use proper prefixes in the subject when sending patches 
("docs/devel:" here), otherwise your patches might not get the right 
attention (at least on my side, it was filtered away as a patch that was 
relevant to me) - and also put some recent contributors on CC:

 Thanks,
  Thomas