linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RFC] Removing wrong judgement of checkpatch.pl for return as function

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:	Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:58:48 +0900 (JST)
From:	Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
To:	apw@...onical.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Removing wrong judgement of checkpatch.pl for
 return as function

From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Removing wrong judgement of checkpatch.pl for return as function
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:49:45 +0000

> On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 10:14:29AM +0900, Hitoshi Mitake wrote:
> 
> > Yes, I post the patch triggered the error I mentioned to lkml recently.
> > I'm attaching the patch the tail of this mail.
> 
> > +		return (pthread_t)0;
> 
> Ahh, now I see how this could occur.  My test case has a variable where
> this has a 0.  I think I've fixed this.  Could you test with the version
> at the URL below (it may take a little time to replicate):
> 
>   http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/apw/checkpatch/checkpatch.pl-testing

I've tested your new checkpatch.pl with the patch I posted as a sample case.
And I didn't get an error I reported! It seems that checkpatch.pl works well.

Thanks,
	Hitoshi
--
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/