linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2] checkpatch: add shebang check to EXECUTE

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:   Tue, 13 Oct 2020 23:01:58 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
        Ujjwal Kumar <ujjwalkumar0501@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] checkpatch: add shebang check to
 EXECUTE_PERMISSIONS

On Wed, 2020-10-14 at 07:46 +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> Just one bigger project example: Comparing clang-format suggestions on 
> patches against checkpatch.pl suggestions are fine-tuning both of them to fit to 
> the actual kernel style.

Eek no.

Mindless use of either tool isn't a great thing.

Linux source code has generally be created with
human readability in mind by humans, not scripts.

Please don't try to replace human readable code
with mindless tools.

If there's something inappropriate in checkpatch,
please mention it.

There is a _lot_ of relatively inappropriate
output in how clang-format changes existing code
in the kernel.

Try it and look at the results.

Improving how .clang-format is created and its
mechanisms (for example: continually out of date
ForEachMacros lists) could be reasonably be done.