linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 24 Oct 2020 08:33:46 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Aditya <yashsri421@...il.com>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        dwaipayanray1@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] checkpatch: fix false positives in REPEATED_WORD
 warning

On Sat, 2020-10-24 at 18:54 +0530, Aditya wrote:
> > Would you like to work on 
> > further rules that can be improved with your evaluation approach?
> 
> Yes, I would like work on further rules.

Some generic ideas:

How about working to reduce runtime and complexity by
making the rules extensible or separable at startup.

Maybe move each existing rules into a separate
directory as an individual file and aggregate them at
checkpatch startup.

Maybe look at the existing rules that do not have a
$fix option and add them as appropriate.

You could fix the multiline indentation where the
current warning and fix is only for a single line

	value = function(arg1,
		arg2,
		arg3);

where checkpatch emits only single warning and fix
for the line with arg2, but not the line with arg3);

Maybe try to make the coding styles supported more
flexible:

Allow braces in different places, support different
tab indentation sizes, spacing rules around operators,
function definition layouts, etc.