GSoC - Code Formatting and Style Checking for RTEMS score

[Ida Delphine]

Hello everyone,
Still waiting for some feedback :)

Cheers,
Ida.

On Mon, 10 May 2021, 5:59 am Ida Delphine, <idadelm at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
> Went through some previous emails and it turns out Sebastian already came
> up with a configuration for clang format which works well for RTEMS except
> for the fact that some configurations haven't been implemented into
> clang-format yet. Using
>
> AlignConsecutiveDeclarations: false
> PointerAlignment: Right
>
> Doesn't seem to work.
> For example in the cpukit/score/src/threadq.c file, something like
>
> RTEMS_STATIC_ASSERT(
> offsetof( Thread_queue_Syslock_queue, Queue.name )
> == offsetof( struct _Thread_queue_Queue, _name ),
> THREAD_QUEUE_SYSLOCK_QUEUE_NAME
> );
>
> RTEMS_STATIC_ASSERT(
> sizeof( Thread_queue_Syslock_queue )
> == sizeof( struct _Thread_queue_Queue ),
> THREAD_QUEUE_SYSLOCK_QUEUE_SIZE
> );
>
> #if defined(RTEMS_SMP)
> void _Thread_queue_Do_acquire_critical(
> Thread_queue_Control *the_thread_queue,
> ISR_lock_Context *lock_context
> )
> {
> _Thread_queue_Queue_acquire_critical(
> &the_thread_queue->Queue,
> &the_thread_queue->Lock_stats,
> lock_context
> );
>
> becomes this after using the given configuration
>
> RTEMS_STATIC_ASSERT(sizeof(Thread_queue_Syslock_queue) ==
> sizeof(struct _Thread_queue_Queue),
> THREAD_QUEUE_SYSLOCK_QUEUE_SIZE);
>
> #if defined(RTEMS_SMP)
> void _Thread_queue_Do_acquire_critical(Thread_queue_Control *
> the_thread_queue,
> ISR_lock_Context *lock_context) {
> _Thread_queue_Queue_acquire_critical(
> &the_thread_queue->Queue, &the_thread_queue->Lock_stats, lock_context);
>
> Everything seems manageable except for this alignment issue...
> This also throws more light on the changes using clang-format (
> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2018-December/024145.html)
>
> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 8:05 PM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 12:47 PM Christian Mauderer <oss at c-mauderer.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Ida and Gedare,
>>>
>>> On 06/05/2021 06:26, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>> > hi Ida,
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 3:21 PM Ida Delphine <idadelm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Hello everyone,
>>> >>
>>> >> Regarding this project (https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3860) I went
>>> with clang-format as we all agreed. I have tested it on some "score" files
>>> and it made some changes which I don't think are very much in line with the
>>> RTEMS coding style. However, it wasn't really clear if we will chage the
>>> RTEMS coding style or try to make changes to clang-format to fit the style.
>>> >> Please will love to know the best option.
>>> >>
>>> > We will likely need to consider our choices carefully. If we can find
>>> > a suitably close style that is already well-supported by clang, and
>>> > get consensus from the maintainers on a change, then that might be the
>>> > best route forward.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> > I think the first thing to do is take the examples
>>> > that have been shown by Sebastian that are "close" but not quite
>>> > perfect, and identify the cases where they differ with RTEMS style in
>>> > order to present for discussion here. If consensus can't be reached to
>>> > change the style, then we would need to have a plan for how to improve
>>> > the existing tools for what we have.
>>>
>>> I also found the following tool quite useful to play with the clang
>>> style config:
>>>
>>> https://zed0.co.uk/clang-format-configurator/
>>>
>>> Maybe it can help a bit to find out what certain options mean.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > However, I think there is interest in doing less work on the tool
>>> > side, and more work on how to integrate it into our workflows better.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>
>> I agree with all of this from the student perspective. But we will have
>> to come to some agreement on a machine producible format to
>> be able to use the integration. A report on what doesn't match would
>> give us something to chew on while Ida works the integration.
>>
>> --joel
>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> >> Cheers,
>>> >> Ida.
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> devel mailing list
>>> >> devel at rtems.org
>>> >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > devel mailing list
>>> > devel at rtems.org
>>> > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel at rtems.org
>>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20210512/80e8b9f5/attachment-0001.html>