linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Add strict test of logical test continuations at beginning of line

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: <20100711213444.4243014c@hyperion.delvare>
Date:	Sun, 11 Jul 2010 21:34:44 +0200
From:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@...csson.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Paul Goyette <paul@...oppee.com>,
	"lm-sensors@...sensors.org" <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/checkpatch.pl: Add strict test of logical test
  continuations at beginning of line

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 11:57:12 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 18:21 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 09:16:58 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 11:31:06AM -0400, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > Kernel style seems to prefer having logical tests at
> > > > end of line rather than start of line.
> > > Ok. Would be nice to have checkpatch.pl complain about it, though,
> > > if it is a to-be-enforced rule.
> > Please, not again. This has been discussed before, with the conclusion
> > that nobody really cares and we don't want to add pointless warnings to
> > checkpatch.pl, which in the end will just dissuade people from running
> > the script and/or contributing to the kernel at all.
> 
> I don't remember that discussion.  Link?

http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/5/65

You started the thread, so I would think you'd remember it.

> Here's a patch that makes it a "--strict" option
> for those who really want to get all the style
> checking options.
> 
> It also corrects a spelling typo.

It's the wrong way of writing patches. Separate things go to separate
patches.

> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com
> ---
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index bd88f11..f0a4c25 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -2180,6 +2180,11 @@ sub process {
>  			ERROR("space required before the open parenthesis '('\n" . $herecurr);
>  		}
>  
> +# Strict only - logical tests should be at EOL, not beginning of new lines
> +		if ($line=~/^.\s*(\&\&|\|\|)/) {
> +			CHK("logical test continuations should be on the previous line\n" . $hereprev);
> +		}
> +

As long as it doesn't bug me by default, I don't really care. But I
still believe this is a waste of everybody's time.

>  # Check for illegal assignment in if conditional -- and check for trailing
>  # statements after the conditional.
>  		if ($line =~ /do\s*(?!{)/) {
> @@ -2299,7 +2304,7 @@ sub process {
>  
>  #no spaces allowed after \ in define
>  		if ($line=~/\#\s*define.*\\\s$/) {
> -			WARN("Whitepspace after \\ makes next lines useless\n" . $herecurr);
> +			WARN("Whitespace after \\ makes next lines useless\n" . $herecurr);
>  		}
>  
>  #warn if <asm/foo.h> is #included and <linux/foo.h> is available (uses RAW line)
> 
> 


-- 
Jean Delvare
--
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/