linux-kernel - [PATCH RFC 2/2] scripts/kernel-doc: check that non-void fcts describe their return value

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]

Message-Id: <1348256940-3212-2-git-send-email-yacine.belkadi.1@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Sep 2012 21:49:00 +0200
From:	Yacine Belkadi <yacine.belkadi.1@...il.com>
To:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
Cc:	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Yacine Belkadi <yacine.belkadi.1@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC 2/2] scripts/kernel-doc: check that non-void fcts describe their return value

If a function has a return value, but its kernel-doc comment doesn't contain a
"Return" section, then emit the following warning:

   Warning(file.h:129): No description found for return value of 'fct'

Note: This check emits a lot of warnings at the moment, because many functions
don't have a 'Return' doc section. So until the number of warnings goes
sufficiently down, the check is only performed in verbose mode.

Signed-off-by: Yacine Belkadi <yacine.belkadi.1@...il.com>
---
 scripts/kernel-doc |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)

diff --git a/scripts/kernel-doc b/scripts/kernel-doc
index 8fd107a..7f82aa8 100755
--- a/scripts/kernel-doc
+++ b/scripts/kernel-doc
@@ -130,6 +130,8 @@ use strict;
 # should document the "Context:" of the function, e.g. whether the functions
 # can be called form interrupts. Unlike other sections you can end it with an
 # empty line.
+# A non-void function should have a "Return:" section describing the return
+# value.
 # Example-sections should contain the string EXAMPLE so that they are marked
 # appropriately in DocBook.
 #
@@ -298,6 +300,7 @@ my $section_default = "Description";	# default section
 my $section_intro = "Introduction";
 my $section = $section_default;
 my $section_context = "Context";
+my $section_return = "Return";
 
 my $undescribed = "-- undescribed --";
 
@@ -1767,6 +1770,28 @@ sub check_sections($$$$$$) {
 }
 
 ##
+# Checks the section describing the return value of a function.
+sub check_return_section {
+        my $file = shift;
+        my $declaration_name = shift;
+        my $return_type = shift;
+
+        # Ignore an empty return type (It's a macro)
+        # Ignore functions with a "void" return type. (But don't ignore "void *")
+        if (($return_type eq "") || ($return_type =~ /void\s*\w*\s*$/)) {
+                return;
+        }
+
+        if (!defined($sections{$section_return}) ||
+            $sections{$section_return} eq "") {
+                print STDERR "Warning(${file}:$.): " .
+                "No description found for return value of " .
+                "'$declaration_name'\n";
+                ++$warnings;
+        }
+}
+
+##
 # takes a function prototype and the name of the current file being
 # processed and spits out all the details stored in the global
 # arrays/hashes.
@@ -1837,6 +1862,15 @@ sub dump_function($$) {
 	my $prms = join " ", @parameterlist;
 	check_sections($file, $declaration_name, "function", $sectcheck, $prms, "");
 
+        # This check emits a lot of warnings at the moment, because many
+        # functions don't have a 'Return' doc section. So until the number
+        # of warnings goes sufficiently down, the check is only performed in
+        # verbose mode.
+        # TODO: always perform the check.
+        if ($verbose) {
+                check_return_section($file, $declaration_name, $return_type);
+        }
+
     output_declaration($declaration_name,
 		       'function',
 		       {'function' => $declaration_name,
-- 
1.7.9.5

--
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/