linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] update checkpatch.pl to version 0.03

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 04 Jun 2007 10:49:53 -0500
From:	jschopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>
To:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] update checkpatch.pl to version 0.03

> This version brings a host of changes to cure false positives and
> bugs detected on patches submitted to lkml and -mm.  It also brings
> a number of new tests in response to reviews, of particular note:
> 
>   - catch use of volatile
>   - allow deprecated functions to be listed in feature-removal-schedule.txt
>   - warn about #ifdef's in c files

I think the design philosophy of the style checker should be to err on the side of being 
quiet.  It shouldn't report things that aren't problems.  There are plenty of valid uses 
of #ifdefs in c files.  #ifdefs may be abused often.  If we start bothering every author 
that uses #ifdefs with an annoying note it detracts from the usefulness of our tool.

If we really want to complain about #ifdefs we should add a flag to the script so it isn't 
a default.  -potential or something.  We could put all the "this often is an error" type 
warnings under it.

The rest of the patch looks fine.

-Joel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/