linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] add a trivial patch style checker II

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]

Message-ID: <20070531120753.GA2538@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Thu, 31 May 2007 14:07:53 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add a trivial patch style checker II

> Yeah, that is a very sensible idea.
> 
> > Possible further checks that might make sense:
> > - panic() anywhere in drivers/* 
> > - externs in .c files without asmlinkage
> > - general checking that everything in a fully visible {} block is the right 
> > indentation
> > 

Here are some more warnings I would like to see:

- Warning for any spinlock/mutex definition that doesn't have a comment
nearby (all locks ought to be documented) 
- Keep an ifdef count and give minus points for too many
- Warn about any architecture ifdefs (__i386__ etc.) 
While not 100% illegal this is definitely something that needs to be 
justified

-Andi

-
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/