Hi all,
    I used scripts/checkpatch.pl to find that many files in the hw directory 
contain lines with more than 80 characters. Therefore, I splited some lines to
fix this warning. 

Thanks,
Gan Qixin

Gan Qixin (10):
  hw/virtio/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/core/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/ide/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/intc/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/misc/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/pci/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/pci-host/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/char/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/input/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters
  hw/riscv/:split some lines containing more than 80 characters

 hw/char/ibex_uart.c              | 12 ++++---
 hw/char/omap_uart.c              |  3 +-
 hw/char/parallel.c               | 12 ++++---
 hw/char/serial.c                 | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 hw/char/virtio-serial-bus.c      |  3 +-
 hw/core/bus.c                    |  3 +-
 hw/core/loader.c                 | 17 ++++++----
 hw/core/machine-hmp-cmds.c       |  6 ++--
 hw/core/machine.c                |  3 +-
 hw/core/qdev-properties-system.c |  4 +--
 hw/ide/ahci.c                    | 10 +++---
 hw/ide/atapi.c                   |  9 ++---
 hw/ide/cmd646.c                  |  3 +-
 hw/ide/core.c                    | 21 ++++++++----
 hw/ide/piix.c                    |  3 +-
 hw/ide/via.c                     |  3 +-
 hw/input/hid.c                   |  3 +-
 hw/input/milkymist-softusb.c     | 16 +++++----
 hw/input/pxa2xx_keypad.c         |  3 +-
 hw/input/virtio-input.c          |  3 +-
 hw/intc/apic.c                   |  3 +-
 hw/intc/arm_gic.c                |  5 +--
 hw/intc/arm_gic_common.c         |  3 +-
 hw/intc/ioapic.c                 |  3 +-
 hw/intc/xics.c                   |  3 +-
 hw/intc/xics_kvm.c               |  3 +-
 hw/misc/aspeed_sdmc.c            | 10 +++---
 hw/misc/bcm2835_mphi.c           |  3 +-
 hw/misc/edu.c                    |  3 +-
 hw/misc/omap_gpmc.c              |  3 +-
 hw/misc/omap_sdrc.c              |  3 +-
 hw/misc/pci-testdev.c            |  3 +-
 hw/misc/sifive_test.c            |  4 +--
 hw/pci-host/gpex-acpi.c          | 18 +++++-----
 hw/pci-host/pam.c                |  4 +--
 hw/pci-host/ppce500.c            |  8 +++--
 hw/pci-host/q35.c                | 11 +++---
 hw/pci-host/versatile.c          |  5 +--
 hw/pci/msi.c                     |  3 +-
 hw/pci/msix.c                    |  8 ++---
 hw/pci/pci.c                     | 31 +++++++++++------
 hw/pci/pci_bridge.c              |  3 +-
 hw/pci/pcie.c                    | 11 +++---
 hw/pci/pcie_host.c               |  4 +--
 hw/riscv/opentitan.c             |  6 ++--
 hw/riscv/sifive_e.c              |  6 ++--
 hw/riscv/sifive_u.c              | 12 ++++---
 hw/virtio/vhost-backend.c        |  3 +-
 hw/virtio/vhost-user-fs.c        |  6 ++--
 hw/virtio/vhost-user.c           | 10 +++---
 hw/virtio/virtio-balloon.c       |  6 ++--
 hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c           |  3 +-
 hw/virtio/virtio-crypto.c        |  3 +-
 hw/virtio/virtio-pci.c           |  4 +--
 hw/virtio/virtio-pci.h           |  8 +++--
 hw/virtio/virtio-rng.c           |  3 +-
 hw/virtio/virtio.c               | 14 +++++---
 57 files changed, 273 insertions(+), 160 deletions(-)

-- 
2.23.0

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 04:30:13AM +0800, Gan Qixin wrote:
> Hi all,
>     I used scripts/checkpatch.pl to find that many files in the hw directory 
> contain lines with more than 80 characters. Therefore, I splited some lines to
> fix this warning.

Do we really need to still fix ourselves to a 80 col limit in the
year 2020 ?

Linux increased their max line length to 100 chars and even set
checkpatch.pl to not complain about that limit unless --strict
is given.

80 chars is fine as a "wish list" target, but IMHO the code often
benefits more from exceeding 80 chars, and not wrapping.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel P. Berrangé [mailto:berrange@redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 7:14 PM
> To: ganqixin <ganqixin@huawei.com>
> Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org; qemu-trivial@nongnu.org; lvivier@redhat.com;
> peter.maydell@linaro.org; Zhanghailiang <zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com>;
> mst@redhat.com; f4bug@amsat.org; alistair.francis@wdc.com; Chenqun
> (kuhn) <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com>; david@gibson.dropbear.id.au
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] Fix line over 80 characters warning
> 
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 04:30:13AM +0800, Gan Qixin wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >     I used scripts/checkpatch.pl to find that many files in the hw
> > directory contain lines with more than 80 characters. Therefore, I
> > splited some lines to fix this warning.
> 
> Do we really need to still fix ourselves to a 80 col limit in the year 2020 ?
> 
> Linux increased their max line length to 100 chars and even set checkpatch.pl
> to not complain about that limit unless --strict is given.
> 
> 80 chars is fine as a "wish list" target, but IMHO the code often benefits more
> from exceeding 80 chars, and not wrapping.
> 

Hi Daniel,
  Yes, you are right! I also found this problem when I try to fix these warning. In some cases, the 80-character limit doesn't necessarily make code more readable. 

Thanks,
Gan Qixin

> Regards,
> Daniel
> --
> |: https://berrange.com      -o-
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
> |: https://libvirt.org         -o-
> https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
> |: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-
> https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|

On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 12:03, Gan Qixin <ganqixin@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>     I used scripts/checkpatch.pl to find that many files in the hw directory
> contain lines with more than 80 characters. Therefore, I splited some lines to
> fix this warning.

I personally have come round to the idea that we should instead
adjust checkpatch so that it doesn't have a hard 80 character
complaint limit.

Compare the kernel coding style change:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=bdc48fa11e46f867ea4d75fa59ee87a7f48be144

whose rationale I agree with. We should *prefer* 80 character
wrapping, but there are some places where an 85-character
line is much more readable and sensible style than inserting
a line break just to please checkpatch.

thanks
-- PMM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Maydell [mailto:peter.maydell@linaro.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 7:15 PM
> To: ganqixin <ganqixin@huawei.com>
> Cc: QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; QEMU Trivial
> <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>; Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>; Philippe
> Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>; Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>;
> David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>; Alistair Francis
> <alistair.francis@wdc.com>; Chenqun (kuhn) <kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com>;
> Zhanghailiang <zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] Fix line over 80 characters warning
> 
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 12:03, Gan Qixin <ganqixin@huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >     I used scripts/checkpatch.pl to find that many files in the hw
> > directory contain lines with more than 80 characters. Therefore, I
> > splited some lines to fix this warning.
> 
> I personally have come round to the idea that we should instead adjust
> checkpatch so that it doesn't have a hard 80 character complaint limit.
> 

Hi Peter,
  It sounds like a good idea, I think I can try to modify checkpatch.pl by referring to the Linux patch.

Thanks,
Gan Qixin

> Compare the kernel coding style change:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=
> bdc48fa11e46f867ea4d75fa59ee87a7f48be144
> 
> whose rationale I agree with. We should *prefer* 80 character wrapping, but
> there are some places where an 85-character line is much more readable and
> sensible style than inserting a line break just to please checkpatch.
> 
> thanks
> -- PMM