linux-kernel - Re: iio: Rename a jump label in iio_buffer_store

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]

Message-ID: <ff3e7353-894b-4fb2-b72c-74dcb1a8f14e@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Sun, 25 Sep 2016 17:17:25 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: iio: Rename a jump label in iio_buffer_store_watermark()

> It's not an inappropriate identifier as it stands. The point is
> that it could be better.

Thanks for your interest in clarifying further improvement possibilities.

>>> Which tool is spitting it out?
>>
>> Are you looking for any special tool?
> I was wondering how you identified these particular
> issues as I wanted to know the logic behind the test.

Do you get any related ideas from information in a message like
"Source code review around jump label usage" (from 2015-12-11)?

https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/11/378
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/<566ABCD9.1060404@...rs.sourceforge.net>

>> Which test do you mean?
> Whatever you used to find these jump labels

There is a general possibility that dedicated scripts for the semantic
patch language can also adjust jump labels as I suggested it for five
functions in this software.

> (the patch series description suggested it was a static checker).

The corresponding five patches are just a result of a source code review
by the means of a current text editor wit extra support for programming.

How do you think about to improve the capabilities of tools for advanced
static source code analysis any further?

Regards,
Markus