linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Staging:rtl8712: Style - Removed inline block comment to fix "Statements should start on a tapstop"

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:   Wed, 8 Aug 2018 22:22:12 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Frank Werner-Krippendorf <mail@...pp.ch>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging:rtl8712: Style - Removed inline block comment to
 fix "Statements should start on a tapstop"

On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 10:59:26AM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
> On 08/08/2018 04:22 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 09:41:06PM +0200, Frank Werner-Krippendorf wrote:
> > > Removed 5 inline comments "/*volatile*/" rtl87x_event.h, to fix
> > > a coding style issue "Statements should start on a tabstop"
> > > detected by checkpatch.pl script.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Frank Werner-Krippendorf <mail@...pp.ch>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_event.h | 10 +++++-----
> > >   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_event.h b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_event.h
> > > index 5171379..2e59e8e 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_event.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/rtl871x_event.h
> > > @@ -90,13 +90,13 @@ struct event_node {
> > >   	unsigned char *node;
> > >   	unsigned char evt_code;
> > >   	unsigned short evt_sz;
> > > -	/*volatile*/ int *caller_ff_tail;
> > > +	int *caller_ff_tail;
> > >   	int	caller_ff_sz;
> > >   };
> > >   struct c2hevent_queue {
> > > -	/*volatile*/ int	head;
> > > -	/*volatile*/ int	tail;
> > 
> > Those "volatile" seem to imply that something is needed for these
> > variables.  Please check to ensure that these are ok to remove in that
> > there is the proper locking for these types of things.
> 
> Those in-line comments are there as a warning that these variables are
> special.

I assumed the comments meant that the locking was buggy...

I'm 100% serious.  Normally that's what volatile means in a driver
context.  Then I interpreted Greg's comments as meaning that warnings
are useful because they show us where the locking bugs are so we
shouldn't fix the warning until after we review the locking.

regards,
dan carpenter