linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix misleading indentation issues in perf

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:	Mon, 14 Dec 2015 12:14:49 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
Cc:	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix misleading indentation issues in perf

Em Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:46:07AM +0000, Matt Fleming escreveu:
> On Sat, 12 Dec, at 07:07:02PM, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > perf doesn't build with gcc-6 because of several misleading-indentation
> > warnings, e.g.:
> > 
> > arch/x86/tests/intel-cqm.c: In function ‘spawn’:
> > arch/x86/tests/intel-cqm.c:21:3: error: statement is indented as if it were guarded by... [-Werror=misleading-indentation]
> >    sleep(5);
> >    ^~~~~
> > 
> > arch/x86/tests/intel-cqm.c:20:2: note: ...this ‘while’ clause, but it is not
> >   while(1);
> >   ^~~~~
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/intel-cqm.c b/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/intel-cqm.c
> > index d28c1b6a3b54..fa5d17af88b7 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/intel-cqm.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/intel-cqm.c
> > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ static pid_t spawn(void)
> >  	if (pid)
> >  		return pid;
> >  
> > -	while(1);
> > +	while(1)
> >  		sleep(5);
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> 
> Whoops. Good catch.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>

So, Markus, can you split this in three patches, stating that in some
cases its just cosmetic stuff while in others really a bug got fixed,
adding the Reviewed-by:  tag for the cqm one? And acked-by for all, from
Ingo?

- Arnaldo
--
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/