linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20171204092045.Horde.5M1LmPnqkpe4as2CWf9PPSh@gator4166.hostgator.com>
Date:   Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:20:45 -0600
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
To:     Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

Hi Joonas,

Quoting Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>:

> On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 16:17 -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
>> where we are expecting to fall through.
>
> I have to say I'm totally not sold on regexps matching comment
> contents. Was something more explicit ever considered? Like:
>
> #define FALLTHROUGH __attribute__((fallthrough));
>
> With the appropriate version checks, of course.
>

One of the arguments is that comments lets us leverage the existing  
static analyzers.

We've been discussing this during the last week, feel free to join the  
discussion:

http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2659908.html
http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2659906.html

Thanks!
--
Gustavo A. R. Silva