On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:00:40PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
On 11/01/2012 11:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
The libvirt coding standard is to use 'function(...args...)' instead of 'function (...args...)'. A non-trivial number of places did not follow this rule and are fixed in this patch.
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com> ---
It would be easier to review if it was split into few more commits, but I'm going for it anyway.
[...]
diff --git a/src/cpu/cpu_x86.c b/src/cpu/cpu_x86.c index e691c04..ca8cd92 100644 --- a/src/cpu/cpu_x86.c +++ b/src/cpu/cpu_x86.c @@ -548,16 +548,16 @@ x86VendorLoad(xmlXPathContextPtr ctxt, }
vendor->cpuid.function = 0; - vendor->cpuid.ebx = (string[0] ) | - (string[1] << 8) | - (string[2] << 16) | - (string[3] << 24); - vendor->cpuid.edx = (string[4] ) | - (string[5] << 8) | - (string[6] << 16) | - (string[7] << 24); - vendor->cpuid.ecx = (string[8] ) | - (string[9] << 8) | + vendor->cpuid.ebx = (string[0]) | + (string[1] << 8) | + (string[2] << 16) | + (string[3] << 24); + vendor->cpuid.edx = (string[4]) | + (string[5] << 8) | + (string[6] << 16) | + (string[7] << 24); + vendor->cpuid.ecx = (string[8]) | + (string[9] << 8) | (string[10] << 16) | (string[11] << 24);
Is this hunk (and similar) necessary? IMHO it doesn't violate the syntax and it's a bit nicer to read.
There is whitespace before the closing ')' here which is being killed.
diff --git a/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c b/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c index 350a8ec..2c0662f 100644 --- a/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c +++ b/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_dhcpsnoop.c @@ -1084,7 +1084,7 @@ virNWFilterSnoopDHCPOpen(const char *ifname, virMacAddr *mac,
virMacAddrFormat(mac, macaddr);
- if (dir == PCAP_D_IN /* from VM */) { + if (dir == PCAP_D_IN) /* from VM */) {
This change fails the build, remove one of the brackets
Opps, I changed this then reverted it, but obviously didn't properly revert it.
[...]
Just a question aside. We don't care about this kind of syntax?
tools/virsh.h:197: bool (*handler) (vshControl *, const vshCmd *);
I know it's even harder to algorithmically check this and I don't require it for this patch, I'm just curious.
I've not been able to find a reliable way to deal with function prototype typedefs like this. If I could, then I'd clean them too. This is one of the main reasons why I skipped all header files in this cleanup Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|