Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Ignore ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_ enum values

[Joe Perches]

On Fri, 2022-12-30 at 22:15 +0100, Gerhard Engleder wrote:
> On 30.12.22 21:31, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-12-30 at 20:59 +0100, Gerhard Engleder wrote:
> > > Since commit 4104a20646 enum values like
> > > ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_Asym_Pause_BIT are ignored. But there are other enums
> > > like ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_1000baseT_Full_BIT, which are not ignored
> > > because of the not matching '1000baseT' substring.
> > > 
> > > Extend regex to match also substrings like '1000baseT'.
> > []
> > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > []
> > > @@ -5780,7 +5780,7 @@ sub process {
> > >   			if ($var !~ /^$Constant$/ &&
> > >   			    $var =~ /[A-Z][a-z]|[a-z][A-Z]/ &&
> > >   #Ignore some autogenerated defines and enum values
> > > -			    $var !~ /^(?:[A-Z]+_){1,5}[A-Z]{1,3}[a-z]/ &&
> > > +			    $var !~ /^(?:[A-Z]+_){1,5}([A-Z]{1,3}[a-z]|[0-9]+[a-z]+[A-Z])/ &&
> > 
> > NAK.
> > 
> > This introduces an unnecessary capture group and as well it would also
> > allow too many other variants that should get a warning.
> 
> A more exact link mode regex [0-9]+base[A-Z0-9]+_(Half|Full) would
> eliminate unwanted matches. Shall I extend the existing regex or
> would a separate regex with comment be the better choice?

Maybe $var !~ /^ETHTOOL_/