linux-kernel - Re: checkpatch.pl: Wrong check SINGLE_STATEMENT_DO_WHILE

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]

Date:	Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:20:53 +0100
From:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
To:	Schrober <franzschrober@...oo.de>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: checkpatch.pl: Wrong check SINGLE_STATEMENT_DO_WHILE_MACRO

On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 10:00:04AM +0200, Schrober wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think your check for SINGLE_STATEMENT_DO_WHILE_MACRO is wrong. Just to give 
> an example:
> 
> #define foobar(x) \
> 	do { \
> 		if (pizza_ready(x)) \
> 			eat_pizza(x); \
> 	} while (0)
> 
> 
> if (hungry(y))
> 	foobar(x);
> else
> 	barfoo(x);
> 
> checkpatch does now complain about something like "WARNING: Single statement 
> macros should not use a do {} while (0) loop"
> 
> But we would have an ambiguous else when the do-while is removed. The code 
> works as expected with the do-while but the else is "attached" to the wrong 
> "if" when the do-while is removed.
> 
> And yes, this example is made that easy to make it easy to understand. There 
> are examples were static inline code would not work very well (vararg for 
> example).
> 
> Please fix or remove your check. Otherwise some people will be start to 
> overeagerly change these macros and break the kernel doing that.

It does appear this check should not apply when a control statement is
included.

-apw
--
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/