linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2] staging: wlan-ng: fix avoid multiple line dereference warning reported by checkpatch.pl

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:   Sun, 12 Mar 2017 17:24:17 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Andrii <tulup@...l.ru>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, sergio.paracuellos@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] staging: wlan-ng: fix avoid multiple line dereference
 warning reported by checkpatch.pl

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 05:47:33PM +0200, Andrii wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:42:07 +0100
> Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 05:30:09PM +0200, Andrii wrote:
> > > Fixed three code style warnings (multiple line dereference) reported
> > > by checkpatch.pl script.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Vladyka <tulup@...l.ru>  
> > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x_usb.c
> > > b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x_usb.c index 6134eba..a050748
> > > 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x_usb.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x_usb.c
> > > @@ -1346,14 +1346,8 @@ hfa384x_docmd(struct hfa384x *hw,
> > >  	} else if (mode == DOWAIT) {
> > >  		struct usbctlx_cmd_completor completor;
> > >  
> > > -		result =
> > > -		    hfa384x_usbctlx_complete_sync(hw, ctlx,
> > > -
> > > init_cmd_completor(&completor,
> > > -
> > > &ctlx->
> > > -
> > > inbuf.
> > > -
> > > cmdresp,
> > > -
> > > &cmd->
> > > -
> > > result));
> > > +		result = hfa384x_usbctlx_complete_sync(hw, ctlx,
> > > +	init_cmd_completor(&completor, &ctlx->inbuf.cmdresp,
> > > &cmd->result))  
> > 
> > Hm, did you run your patch through checkpatch?  There's no way that
> > his code is correct :(
> > 
> > greg k-h
> 
> Yes, I did. The code is correct. Checkpatch now reports "Alignment
> should match open parenthesis" CHECK, which is obviously better than
> original WARNING.

Really?  No, it's much worse.  Indentation should be obvious when
looking at the code, right now this is just so wrong it hurts my brain
to look at (seriously, coding style is there for your brain, not because
we are crazy picky developers.)

Also you forgot a trailing ';' did that even compile?

thanks,

greg k-h