linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: vme_user: fix check alignment should match open parenthesis

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:   Fri, 28 Jul 2023 20:59:12 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To:     Alexon Oliveira <alexondunkan@...il.com>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, martyn@...chs.me.uk,
        manohar.vanga@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: vme_user: fix check alignment should match open
 parenthesis

On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 02:43:12PM -0300, Alexon Oliveira wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 08:24:56AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 02:37:54PM -0300, Alexon Oliveira wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > I would have thought you would get a "line is too long" warning, that
> > > > didn't happen?
> > > $ pwd
> > > /home/alolivei/git/kernels/staging
> > > $ perl scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict -f drivers/staging/vme_user/vme_bridge.h | grep -i parenthesis
> > > $ 
> > > Nope. I didn't get any of that. Check it out:
> > 
> > Heh.  The warning is there but you used grep to remove it.
> > 
> 
> I only used grep so as not to pollute my answer with too long
> output, but you can validate the full output by running the following:
> 
> curl -ks https://people.redhat.com/alolivei/kernel/evidence
> 
> You'll see there's no warning related to this patch.

I checked before I emailed you...  The warning is there in your URL as
well.

CHECK: line length of 121 exceeds 100 columns
#133: FILE: drivers/staging/vme_user/vme_bridge.h:133:
+	int (*slave_set)(struct vme_slave_resource *, int, unsigned long long, unsigned long long, dma_addr_t, u32, u32);

> As I mentioned, there are other warnings that were already there before
> I submitted the patch, and I didn't touch them (yet).

No, these warnings are new.  Here are the relevant lines from the diff.
Originally it was short and now it's a bajillion characters long.

-       int (*slave_set)(struct vme_slave_resource *, int, unsigned long long,
-               unsigned long long, dma_addr_t, u32, u32);
+       int (*slave_set)(struct vme_slave_resource *, int, unsigned long long, unsigned long long, dma_addr_t, u32, u32);

regards,
dan carpenter