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 <j...@rtems.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 12:47 PM Christian Mauderer <o...@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 <idad...@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@rtems.org
>> >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > devel mailing list
>> > devel@rtems.org
>> > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel@rtems.org
>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
