linux-kernel - Re: false positive in checkpatch.pl (complex macro values)

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: <ed10ee420708240543r27db83e9l25300c2799c7c2cd@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 24 Aug 2007 05:43:47 -0700
From:	"SL Baur" <steve@...acs.org>
To:	"Andy Whitcroft" <apw@...dowen.org>
Cc:	"Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@...il.com>,
	"Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Michael Hennerich" <michael.hennerich@...log.com>
Subject: Re: false positive in checkpatch.pl (complex macro values)

On 8/24/07, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org> wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > in some code that does like:
> > #define foo { a, b, c, \
> >     d, e, f, g }
> > ...
> > int boo[] = foo;
> > ...
> >
> > checkpatch.pl throws a fit:
> > ERROR: Macros with complex values should be enclosed in parenthesis
> > #10: FILE: ...
> > +#define foo {a, b, c, d}
> >
> > perhaps the check should also allow {...} ?  or ignore lists like this ...
> > -mike
>
> Ok, we can add that to the check.  Next update will allow that.
>
> Thanks for the report.

I sent a reply accidentally only to Mike and not the list.  I think the
error message is wrong.  That is really ugly code.  Linux Kernel code
believes in C not preprocessor tricks, so why would you need this?

Who uses code like this, by the way?

-sb
-
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/