Re: [PATCH] net/bpf_jit: SPARC: drop unneeded semicolon
[email protected] Sat, 1 Aug 2026 19:44:56 +0000 (UTC)
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ports.sparc,gmane.linux.kernel.janitors,gmane.linux.kernel.bpf,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <bf0ce87a4c9b050b1e438612e78517d5c321624fd09303341cc07bd172d2c627@mail.kernel.org> |
--===============7729938306852420091==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> net/bpf_jit: SPARC: drop unneeded semicolon
>
> When a function-like macro expands to an expression, that expression
> doesn't need a semicolon after it. All uses have been verified to
> have their own semicolons.
>
> This was found using the following Coccinelle semantic patch:
>
> @r@
> identifier i : script:ocaml() { String.lowercase_ascii i = i };
> expression e;
> @@
>
> *#define i(...) e;
>
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <[email protected]>
The change itself looks right. Both emit_cmpi() and emit_btsti() are
only used from bpf_jit_compile(), and every one of those six call sites
already ends in its own semicolon, so the expansions stay well formed.
This isn't a bug, but would a prefix like "bpf, sparc:" fit better here?
The changed file is arch/sparc/net/bpf_jit_comp_32.c rather than anything
under net/, and earlier patches touching this file used prefixes along
the lines of "bpf, sparc:", "bpf, sparc64:" or "sparc: bpf:".
---
AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md
CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/30714427730
--===============7729938306852420091==--