linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] Coccinelle: Check for return not matching function signature

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:	Tue, 05 May 2015 14:32:59 +0200
From:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:	Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>
CC:	cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Coccinelle: Check for return not matching function
 signature

> Check if the signature of a function and the return value type match.

Is this a task that is usually performed by a compiler?


> In many cases this mismatch will have no side-effects
> but in some cases it may lead to hard to locate problems

It is another software development challenge to find concrete
open issues there.


> - and for readability and code understanding it is also helpful
> when types match.

How would you like to check for compatible data types here?


> The output is a bit lengthy - not sure if that is too much
> but it seemed useful to me to see the non-matching types explicitly
> in the warning message.

How do you think about to import the result list into a database table?


> +if T1 != T2:
> +   print "%s:%s,%s WARNING: return of wrong type (%s != %s)" % (p[0].file,fn,p[0].line,T1,T2)

Is such a check a bit too simple?

Regards,
Markus

--
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/