linux-kernel - Re: possible new false positive in checkpatch

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 11 Jun 2016 10:33:38 +0300
From:	Tal Shorer <tal.shorer@...il.com>
To:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Cc:	joe@...ches.com,
	"<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: possible new false positive in checkpatch

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 05:50:40PM +0300, Tal Shorer wrote:
>
>> > Yes it feels like that should be eliding them completely, and likely any
>> > following space as well, something like this:
>> >
>> >         $s =~ s/$;+\s*//g;
>> >         $c =~ s/$;+\s*//g;
>> >
>> Replacing the problematic lines with these fixes the issue.
>> > > Introduced in commit 9f5af480f4554aac12e002b6f5c2b04895857700:
>> > > checkpatch: improve SUSPECT_CODE_INDENT test
>> > > Commenting out these lines removes the warning.
>> > >
>> > > This pattern exists in many places around the kernel source.
>> > > Is this the intended behavior?
>> >
>> > Seems wrong to me.
>> >
>> > -apw
>>
>> Which git tree is checkpatch developed in? Linus's?
>
> Yeah in Linus' tree.
>
> -apw
This still isn't fixed. Should I submit Andy's change myself? Feels
like plagiarize.