linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed Trivial Warnings in file: Deleted Spaces prior to tabs, and added lines. modified: kernel/auditfilter.c

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, 21 Oct 2015 06:58:38 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Cc:	Scott Matheina <scott@...heina.com>,
	Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, linux-audit@...hat.com,
	trivial@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed Trivial Warnings in file: Deleted Spaces
 prior to tabs, and added lines. modified: kernel/auditfilter.c

On Mon, 2015-10-19 at 12:10 -0400, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> On 15/10/18, Scott Matheina wrote:
> > On 10/14/2015 04:54 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Saturday, October 10, 2015 08:57:55 PM Scott Matheina wrote:
[]
> > >> diff --git a/kernel/auditfilter.c b/kernel/auditfilter.c
[]
> > >> @@ -109,6 +109,7 @@ void audit_free_rule_rcu(struct rcu_head *head)
> > >>  {
> > >>  	struct audit_entry *e = container_of(head, struct audit_entry, rcu);
> > >>  	audit_free_rule(e);
> > >> +
> > >>  }
> > > Why?
> > 
> > I was following the error messages in checkpatch.pl, but the warning
> > went away after adding this line. No problem with the code. 
> 
> That sounds like a bug in checkpatch.pl, since that blank line should be
> tween the declaration and the function call.

checkpatch message asks for a blank line after the
"struct audit_entry *e = ..." declaration.

> > >>  	while (*list != ~0U) {
> > >> +
> > >>  		unsigned n = *list++;
> > >>  		if (n >= AUDIT_BITMASK_SIZE * 32 - AUDIT_SYSCALL_CLASSES) {
> > >>  			kfree(p);
> > > Why?
> > 
> > This is the same as above. Just going through the checkpatch.pl
> > script, and looking for warnings to fix. 
> 
> Again, another manifestation of that bug?  That blank line should be
> after the declaration and before the if statement.
[]
> Well, I agree, you have to start somewhere...  Too bad you hit a bug in
> checkpatch.pl!

Here too, not a bug in checkpatch.

checkpatch output asks for a blank line after the
"unsigned n" declaration, not before.


--
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/