linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v6] lib/list-test: add a test for the 'list' doubly linked list

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: <af4a5d9d77482fb538b780989235d6d17d1f39cc.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Wed, 30 Oct 2019 09:31:45 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc:     shuah <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v6] lib/list-test: add a test for
 the 'list' doubly linked list

On Wed, 2019-10-30 at 13:42 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 01:02:11AM -0700, David Gow wrote:
> > > ERROR: that open brace { should be on the previous line
> > > #869: FILE: lib/list-test.c:680:
> > > +static void list_test_list_for_each_entry_reverse(struct kunit *test)
> > > +{
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I am seeing these error and warns. As per our hallway conversation, the
> > > "for_each*" in the test naming is tripping up checkpatch.pl
> > > 
> > > For now you can change the name a bit to not trip checkpatch and maybe
> > > explore fixing checkpatch to differentiate between function names
> > > with "for_each" in them vs. the actual for_each usages in the code.
[]
> It's better to ignore checkpatch and other scripts when they are wrong.
> (unless the warning message inspires you to make the code more readable
> for humans).

True.