linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: loopback: enclose macro statements in do-while loop

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Y0we0XPpye+Vjznr@kroah.com>
Date:   Sun, 16 Oct 2022 17:10:09 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Deepak R Varma <drv@...lo.com>
Cc:     outreachy@...ts.linux.dev, pure.logic@...us-software.ie,
        johan@...nel.org, elder@...nel.org, greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: loopback: enclose macro statements in
 do-while loop

On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 10:19:12AM -0400, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> Include multiple statements of macro definition inside do-while{0} loop
> to avoid possible partial program execution. Issue reported by
> checkpatch script:
> 
> ERROR: Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while loop
> 
> Signed-off-by: Deepak R Varma <drv@...lo.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> index 1a61fce98056..37214cb43937 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> @@ -163,9 +163,11 @@ static ssize_t name##_avg_show(struct device *dev,		\
>  static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(name##_avg)
> 
>  #define gb_loopback_stats_attrs(field)				\
> +do {								\
>  	gb_loopback_ro_stats_attr(field, min, u);		\
>  	gb_loopback_ro_stats_attr(field, max, u);		\
> -	gb_loopback_ro_avg_attr(field)
> +	gb_loopback_ro_avg_attr(field);				\
> +} while (0)
> 
>  #define gb_loopback_attr(field, type)					\
>  static ssize_t field##_show(struct device *dev,				\
> --
> 2.30.2

Always test-build your changes before sending them out so you do not get
grumpy maintainers asking why you did not test-build your changes.

Also, don't bindly trust that checkpatch is always correct, you need to
read the C code to verify that it is a sane request.

thanks,

greg k-h