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:   Fri, 18 Aug 2017 10:03:17 +0200
From:   Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@...e.de>
To:     SZ Lin <sz.lin@...a.com>
Cc:     ashleydlai@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com, jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com,
        tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, paulus@...ba.org,
        peterhuewe@....de, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        tpmdd@...horst.ne,
        Linuxppc-dev 
        <linuxppc-dev-bounces+msuchanek=suse.de@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Use __func__ instead of function name

On 2017-07-29 09:24, SZ Lin wrote:
> Fix following checkpatch.pl warning:
> WARNING: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using
> the function's name, in a string
> 
> Signed-off-by: SZ Lin <sz.lin@...a.com>
> ---
>  drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c 
> b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c
> index e75a674b44ac..2d33acc43e25 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_ibmvtpm.c
> @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ static int tpm_ibmvtpm_send(struct tpm_chip *chip,
> u8 *buf, size_t count)
>  	rc = ibmvtpm_send_crq(ibmvtpm->vdev, be64_to_cpu(word[0]),
>  			      be64_to_cpu(word[1]));
>  	if (rc != H_SUCCESS) {
> -		dev_err(ibmvtpm->dev, "tpm_ibmvtpm_send failed rc=%d\n", rc);
> +		dev_err(ibmvtpm->dev, "%s failed rc=%d\n", __func__, rc);

Can function name contain a %?

I would prefer dev_err(ibmvtpm->dev, __func__ " failed rc=%d\n", rc);

It's not what checkpatch advises in the above message, though.

Presumably with many messages from the same function using %s would
save space but that is not the usual case.

Thanks

Michal


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ