linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: lustre: lustre: resolve "use spaces between elements" checkpatch errors

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: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1706151700220.11322@casper.infradead.org>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2017 17:03:53 +0100 (BST)
From:   James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
        Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: lustre: lustre: resolve "use spaces between
 elements" checkpatch errors


> On Wed, 2017-06-14 at 11:01 -0400, James Simmons wrote:
> > Due to the way the DFID was embedded in our debug strings checkpatch
> > would report the following error:
> 
> unrelated trivia
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h
> []
> > @@ -532,7 +532,7 @@ static inline void obd_uuid2fsname(char *buf, char *uuid, int buflen)
> >  #define FID_NOBRACE_LEN 40
> >  #define FID_LEN (FID_NOBRACE_LEN + 2)
> >  #define DFID_NOBRACE "%#llx:0x%x:0x%x"
> 
> It's odd to use a mixture of %#x and 0x%x.
> 
> Using
> 	#define DFID_NOBRACE "%#llx:%#x:%#x"
> would also save a couple bytes per use.

Changing that format would break things very badly. This is used in user 
land utilities and the kernel code. 
 
> Does there need to be a difference between an SFID
> and a DFID_NOBRACE?