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

[Alex Bennée]

Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> writes:

> Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
>> 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?
>
> Yes, that is the actitude.
>
> I got sick when I see new code that still does:
>
> char *foo = (char *)malloc(...);
>
> It is is C89, it has been enough to know that it is not needed.
>
> And yes, that particular one is not used in qemu anymore, but:
>
> void *opaque;
>
> ....
>
> Foo *foo = (Foo *)opaque;
>
> Is still introduced in new code, and it is not needed since C89.
>
>>> 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:
>
> I didn't knew the docs/devel preffix.
>
> About the CC'd, I expected that git-publish be good enough at doing
> that, but it appears not.

I've just sent:

  Subject: [RFC PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add a section for policy documents
  Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2023 17:38:36 +0000
  Message-Id: <20230324173836.1821275-1-alex.bennee@linaro.org>

to collect willing victims^H^H^H^H^H^H volunteers who want to track
project related discussions like this. 

>
> Anyways, thanks.
>
> Later, Juan.


-- 
Alex Bennée
Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro