linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kmemcheck: fix sparse warning

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: <19f34abd0907081228p541d1cdao85f37aaa479fcfc5@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 8 Jul 2009 21:28:24 +0200
From:	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:	Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kmemcheck: fix sparse warning

2009/7/6 Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>:
> Whether or not the sparse warning
>
> warning: do-while statement is not a compound statement
>
> is justified or not in this case, it is annoying and
> trivial to fix.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
> ---
>  include/linux/kmemcheck.h |    4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- wireless-testing.orig/include/linux/kmemcheck.h     2009-07-06 11:41:16.000000000 +0200
> +++ wireless-testing/include/linux/kmemcheck.h  2009-07-06 11:41:30.000000000 +0200
> @@ -137,13 +137,13 @@ static inline void kmemcheck_mark_initia
>        int name##_end[0];
>
>  #define kmemcheck_annotate_bitfield(ptr, name)                         \
> -       do if (ptr) {                                                   \
> +       do { if (ptr) {                                                 \
>                int _n = (long) &((ptr)->name##_end)                    \
>                        - (long) &((ptr)->name##_begin);                \
>                BUILD_BUG_ON(_n < 0);                                   \
>                                                                        \
>                kmemcheck_mark_initialized(&((ptr)->name##_begin), _n); \
> -       } while (0)
> +       } } while (0)
>
>  #define kmemcheck_annotate_variable(var)                               \
>        do {                                                            \
>
>
>

I'll change the patch title to "kmemcheck: work around bogus sparse
warning" and fix the indentation, sounds ok?

Meanwhile, I Cced sparse mailing list in case somebody else knows
anything else about this warning (what it means, whether it's
justified in this case, whether it should be fixed in sparse, etc.).

Thanks.


Vegard