linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add --strict test for function pointer calling style

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:	Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:30:52 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add --strict test for function pointer
 calling style

On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 14:12 -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 11/05/2014 01:41 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Peter Hurley wrote:
> > 
> > The use of older function ptr calling style, (*fn)(), makes static
> > analysis more error-prone; replace with modern fn() style.
> > 
> > So make checkpatch emit a --strict test for that condition.
> > 
> > Update the unnecessary parentheses test for dereferencing
> > objects at the same time and create a $fix mechanism too.
> 
> Cool.
> 
> perl's not my thing; how does it know not to trip up on
> 
> 	initcall_t *call;
> 
> 	(*call)();
> 
> [which I verified it properly does not flag in drivers/tty/tty_io.c]

because the regex only matches "(foo->bar)("

It doesn't match (*foo->bar)("

and foo->bar could be any number of -> or . uses like

"(foo->bar.baz)("

or

"( foo -> bar . baz ) ("

--
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/