linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Coccinelle: Add a SmPL script for the reconsideration of redundant dev

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1907011442390.4005@hadrien>
Date:   Mon, 1 Jul 2019 14:47:25 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
cc:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        Coccinelle <cocci@...teme.lip6.fr>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ding Xiang <dingxiang@...s.chinamobile.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Coccinelle: Add a SmPL script for the reconsideration
 of redundant dev_err() calls



On Mon, 1 Jul 2019, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:

> On 01.07.19 10:10, Markus Elfring wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> > +@...ipt:python to_do depends on org@
> > +p << or.p;
> > +@@
> > +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0],
> > +                        "WARNING: An error message is probably not needed here because the devm_ioremap_resource() function contains appropriate error reporting.")
> > +
> > +@...ipt:python reporting depends on report@
> > +p << or.p;
> > +@@
> > +coccilib.report.print_report(p[0],
> > +                             "WARNING: An error message is probably not needed here because the devm_ioremap_resource() function contains appropriate error reporting.")
> > --
>
> By the way: do we have any mechanism for explicitly suppressing
> individual warnings (some kind of annotation), when the maintainer is
> sure that some particular case is a false-positive ?
> (I'm thinking of something similar to certain #praga directives for
> explicitly ignoring invididual warnings in specific lines of code)
>
> I believe such a feature, so we don't get spammed with the same false
> positives again and again.

0-day takes care of it on its own.  Probably other such bots do the same.
I'm not sure that it is a good idea to clutter the kernel code with such
annotations, especially since the whole point of Ccocinelle is that the
rules are easy to change.  We also made a tool named Herodotos for
collecting identical reports over time, but it seems to be not so easy to
use.

julia