[dpdk-test-report] |WARNING| pw79675 [PATCH] net/memif: use abstract socket address
checkpatch at dpdk.org
checkpatch at dpdk.org
Tue Oct 6 11:44:41 CEST 2020
Test-Label: checkpatch
Test-Status: WARNING
http://dpdk.org/patch/79675
_coding style issues_
WARNING:TYPO_SPELLING: 'dissapears' may be misspelled - perhaps 'disappears'?
#71:
filesystem pathnames and the socket dissapears
CHECK:BRACES: braces {} should be used on all arms of this statement
#120: FILE: drivers/net/memif/memif_socket.c:889:
+ if (is_abstract) {
[...]
+ } else
[...]
ERROR:C99_COMMENTS: do not use C99 // comments
#121: FILE: drivers/net/memif/memif_socket.c:890:
+ // abstract address
CHECK:BRACES: Unbalanced braces around else statement
#124: FILE: drivers/net/memif/memif_socket.c:893:
+ } else
WARNING:TYPO_SPELLING: 'SLAVE' may be misspelled - perhaps 'SECONDARY'?
#134: FILE: drivers/net/memif/memif_socket.c:971:
+ (pmd->role == MEMIF_ROLE_SLAVE) ? 0 : 1, pmd->flags & ETH_MEMIF_FLAG_SOCKET_ABSTRACT);
WARNING:LONG_LINE: line over 100 characters
#134: FILE: drivers/net/memif/memif_socket.c:971:
+ (pmd->role == MEMIF_ROLE_SLAVE) ? 0 : 1, pmd->flags & ETH_MEMIF_FLAG_SOCKET_ABSTRACT);
CHECK:BRACES: braces {} should be used on all arms of this statement
#162: FILE: drivers/net/memif/memif_socket.c:1076:
+ if (pmd->flags & ETH_MEMIF_FLAG_SOCKET_ABSTRACT) {
[...]
+ } else
[...]
ERROR:C99_COMMENTS: do not use C99 // comments
#163: FILE: drivers/net/memif/memif_socket.c:1077:
+ // abstract address
CHECK:BRACES: Unbalanced braces around else statement
#166: FILE: drivers/net/memif/memif_socket.c:1080:
+ } else
ERROR:C99_COMMENTS: do not use C99 // comments
#220: FILE: drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c:1747:
+ // use abstract address by default
ERROR:TRAILING_WHITESPACE: trailing whitespace
#243: FILE: drivers/net/memif/rte_eth_memif.c:1795:
+^I^Iif (ret < 0)^I$
total: 4 errors, 3 warnings, 4 checks, 166 lines checked
More information about the test-report
mailing list