linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86, apic: Enable x2APIC physical when cpu

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:	Sat, 17 Aug 2013 09:26:43 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Youquan Song <youquan.song@...ux.intel.com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
	Youquan Song <youquan.song@...el.com>,
	Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, apic: Enable x2APIC physical when cpu < 256 native

On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 17:44 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 02:03:51AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > checkpatch tends to be used for firs patch submissions and
> > adding it would only encourage a new wave of trivial whitespace
> > patches.
> 
> Nope, we definitely don't want that...
> 
> > I think there are already way, _way_ too many existing instances
> > of comments that are of the form
> > 	/* foo
> > 	 * ...
> > to add that.
> > 
> > There are 10s of thousands outside of net/ and drivers/net/.
> 
> ... unless there's a way to detect new submissions and scream only
> for those. I.e., look at lines starting with "+" which don't have
> corresponding "-" lines.

No, that's not the right way to do that.
That bit's relatively easy because checkpatch only looks
at files when there's a specific command line -f flag.
So just check the existence of the -f command line flag
(!$file) and for an added comment that starts "/* foo" without
a comment termination */ after it on the same line.

> This would need a bit of experimenting and is not trivial though, maybe
> Algorithm::Diff could even help there.
> 
> Sounds like a mini-project for a perl dude :-)

I'm not one of those...

This might work though

 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 9ba4fc4..abe820a 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -2119,6 +2119,15 @@ sub process {
 			}
 		}
 
+		if (!$file &&
+		    $realfile !~ m@^(drivers/net/|net/)@ &&
+		    $rawline =~ /^\+/ &&	#Added line
+		    $rawline !~ m@/\*.*\*/@ &&	#whole comments
+		    $rawline =~ m@/\*+.+@) {	#unterminated comment
+			WARN("COMMENT_STYLE",
+			     "block comments use an empty /* line\n" . $herecurr);
+		}
+
 		if ($realfile =~ m@^(drivers/net/|net/)@ &&
 		    $prevrawline =~ /^\+[ \t]*\/\*[ \t]*$/ &&
 		    $rawline =~ /^\+[ \t]*\*/) {


--
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/