linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] checkpatch: fix false positives in REPEATED

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: <c4432b0c-3e21-20ec-d439-cdfebc283148@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 24 Oct 2020 14:58:17 +0530
From:   Aditya <yashsri421@...il.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        lukas.bulwahn@...il.com, dwaipayanray1@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] checkpatch: fix false positives in REPEATED_WORD
 warning

On 24/10/20 7:07 am, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 05:38 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote: 
>> A quick evaluation on v5.6..v5.8 showed that this fix reduces
>> REPEATED_WORD warnings from 2797 to 907.
> 
> How many of these 907 remaining are still false positive?
>  
>> A quick manual check found all cases are related to hex output or
>> list command outputs in commit messages.
> 
> You mean 1890 of the 2797 are now no longer reported and all 1890
> were false positives yes?
> 

Yes. In v5.6..5.8, there were 2797 warnings for REPEATED_WORD, after
these changes, they are reduced to 907.
However, many among these 907 must have been fixed by Dwaipayan's
patch. I'll replace it with 1890 instead, for the better.

>>  			pos($rawline) = 1 if (!$in_commit_log);
>>  			while ($rawline =~ /\b($word_pattern) (?=($word_pattern))/g) {
>>  
>>
>> @@ -3074,6 +3076,17 @@ sub process {
>>  				next if ($start_char =~ /^\S$/);
>>  				next if (index(" \t.,;?!", $end_char) == -1);
>>  
>>
>> +                                # avoid repeating hex occurrences like 'ff ff fe 09 ...'
>> +                                my %allow_repeated_words = (
>> +                                        add => '',
>> +                                        added => '',
>> +                                        bad => '',
>> +                                        be => '',
>> +                                );
> 
> If perl caches this local hash declaration, fine,
> but I think it better to use 'our %allow_repeated_words'
> and move it so it's only declared using the file scope.
> 

I ran checkpatch over few commits, it was working fine. But I'll move
it to file scope, using 'our'. That should do as well.

>> +                                if ($first =~ /\b[0-9a-f]{2,}\b/) {
> 
> This regex matches only lower case so it wouldn't match "Add".
> 
> I think this regex would be clearer using
> 	/^[0-9a-f]+$/i or /^[A-Fa-f0-9]+$/
> 
> 

Missed it. Will do.

Thanks
Aditya