linux-kernel - possible new false positive in checkpatch

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 12 Sep 2015 15:13:31 +0300
From:	Tal Shorer <tal.shorer@...il.com>
To:	tal.shorer@...il.com, apw@...onical.com, joe@...ches.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: possible new false positive in checkpatch

Since my last pull from upstream (today) , I started seeing some
checkpatch warnings regarding suspect code indent I believe are false
positive. Take this code for example:

static int foo(void)
{
	while (bar())
		/* do nothing */;
}

When running checkpath on it, the following warning is emitted:

tal@tal:~/Dev/lfs/linux|0 $ scripts/checkpatch.pl -f ~/tmp/foo.c
WARNING: suspect code indent for conditional statements (8, 32)
#3: FILE: /home/tal/tmp/foo.c:3:
+	while (bar())
+		/* do nothing */;

total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 5 lines checked

/home/tal/tmp/foo.c has style problems, please review.

NOTE: If any of the errors are false positives, please report
      them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
tal@tal:~/Dev/lfs/linux|1 $ 

Using my limited perl knowledge, I believe the lines causing this are
3111-3133:
			# remove inline comments
			$s =~ s/$;/ /g;
			$c =~ s/$;/ /g;
Introduced in commit 9f5af480f4554aac12e002b6f5c2b04895857700:
checkpatch: improve SUSPECT_CODE_INDENT test
Commenting out these lines removes the warning.

This pattern exists in many places around the kernel source.
Is this the intended behavior?
--
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/