linux-kernel - Re: coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do

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: <ac9f19ae-252b-32ce-0bd2-170ecc0ea14e@web.de>
Date:   Sun, 5 Jan 2020 13:07:35 +0100
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>,
        Wen Yang <wenyang@...ux.alibaba.com>, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr
Cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Matthias Männich <maennich@...gle.com>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: coccinelle: semantic patch to check for inappropriate do_div()
 calls

>>> +(
>>> +* do_div(f, l);
>>> +|
>>> +* do_div(f, ul);
>>> +|
>>> +* do_div(f, ul64);
>>> +|
>>> +* do_div(f, sl64);
>>> +)
>>
>> I suggest to avoid the specification of duplicate SmPL code.
>>
>> +@@
>> +*do_div(f, \( l \| ul \| ul64 \| sl64 \) );
>
> I don't se any point to this.

Can such succinct SmPL code be occasionally desirable?


> The original code is quite readable,

Yes. - I dare to present a coding style alternative.


> without the ugly \( etc.

I wonder about this view.


>> Please improve the message construction.
>
> Please make more precise comments (I already made some suggestions,

Thus I omitted a repetition.


> so it doesn't matter much here, but "please improve" does not provide any
> concrete guidance).

I guess that Wen Yang can know corresponding software design possibilities
from previous development discussions.

Regards,
Markus