linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] lib/test_string.c: Make definition less dense

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]

Message-ID: <CAHp75VfK3RM+SP90d3nOXEobY81Xd_94tLL=Qt86mmdNwXaQpg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 28 Feb 2023 21:03:00 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn@...osinc.com>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] lib/test_string.c: Make definition less dense

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 8:42 PM Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Björn Töpel <bjorn@...osinc.com>
>
> Checkpatch seems to have trouble making sense of the situation when
> struct definitions, variable definitions, and __initconst marking is
> done in one go.
>
> Let's be nicer to checkpatch, and move the struct definition out,
> which removes the error.

Not that I'm against the patch, but how hard is it to fix the checkpatch?

In case you go this way with a patch, it probably makes sense to move
test data out of the function as well with something like
strspn_test_data name.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko