linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] checkpatch: add Kconfig 'default n' test

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:	Tue, 7 Jun 2016 21:16:42 +0800
From:	Yingjoe Chen <yingjoe.chen@...iatek.com>
To:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
CC:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] checkpatch: add Kconfig 'default n' test


Hi,

Thanks for the review.


On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 20:10 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 09:43:15AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Sat, 2016-06-04 at 13:10 +0800, Yingjoe Chen wrote:
> > > If a Kconfig config option doesn't specify 'default', the default
> > > will be n. Adding 'default n' is unnecessary.
> > > Add a test to warn about this.
> > 
> > Is it obvious that a Kconfig has "default n" ?
> > This seems to work, but is this useful?


While sending patch for upstream, I saw maintainers request it to be
removed. So I think it might worth adding check to it.
Some examples from google:

http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-September/120733.html
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/16/153
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/23/657


> 
> > > +		if ($realfile =~ /Kconfig/ &&
> > > +		    $line =~ /^\+\s*default\s*n\s*(#.*|$)/i) {
> 
> I wonder particually when the submitter has supplied a comment, presumably
> to tell us why it defaults to 'n'.  I feel more accepting of rejecting
> uncommented ones than those with.


How about change this to /^\+\s*default\s*n$/i ?

Joe.C