linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2.6.31.1] include/linux/kmemcheck.h: fix a 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: <19f34abd0910020051h5a831729vcfca50b7bd9f9104@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 2 Oct 2009 09:51:16 +0200
From:	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To:	Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vegard Nossum <vegardno@....uio.no>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.31.1] include/linux/kmemcheck.h: fix a sparse warning

2009/10/2 Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>:
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Bart Van Assche
> <bart.vanassche@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> Checking a 2.6.31.1 kernel configured with allyesconfig/allmodconfig
>> with sparse (make C=2) triggers a sparse warning on code that uses the
>> kmemcheck_annotate_bitfield() macro. An example of such a warning:
>>
>> include/net/inet_sock.h:208:17: warning: do-while statement is not a compound statement
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>
>> Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegardno@....uio.no>
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>>
>> --- linux-2.6.31.1/include/linux/kmemcheck-orig.h       2009-09-26 13:53:44.000000000 +0200
>> +++ linux-2.6.31.1/include/linux/kmemcheck.h    2009-09-26 13:53:56.000000000 +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 {                                                            \
>
> (ping)
>
> Did anyone already have the time to review the patch above ?
>
> Bart.

Hi,

A patch for this problem has already been applied in latest mainline.
Thanks anyway, and sorry for not responding sooner.


Vegard