linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Add warning about leading contination tests

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: <1260126506.11126.110.camel@Joe-Laptop.home>
Date:	Sun, 06 Dec 2009 11:08:26 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Add warning about leading 
 contination tests

On Sun, 2009-12-06 at 19:53 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> I want to be able to tell
> people who submit patches to me: "run checkpatch.pl on your patch and
> solve every problem it reports before sending it to me again". If I
> must instead tell them: "run checkpatch.pl on your patch and fix what
> you want" then they might as well not fix anything, because they will
> not know which warnings _I_ find relevant and which I don't. Then the
> checkpatch.pl script becomes useless for that use case.

If you actually do that, you probably want them
to fix _every last problem_ because the patch is
either trivial or has so many broken elements
that asking that contributor to fix them all is
a learning experience for them.

> So if you are going to add checks which are icing on the cake, please
> disable them by default and only show them if the user explicitly asks

Making the test use the CHK function rather
than WARNING one seems sensible.

> > I think it's rather like the long line, >80
> > column warning.  There are a whole lot more
> > than 8k long lines in kernel source and no
> > one is suggesting reformatting all of them
> > out of existence.
> 
> Lines longer than 8_k_? I hope not ;)

Interpretive reading is like interpretive dance.
I've used compilers like that...

cheers, Joe

--
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/