linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] compiler.h: add __chkp_no_side

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: <CAHk-=wiwpTUr8keTinnPU8kTN9dpYgDtwM4wONRF_j=1gvo3MQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2025 17:09:59 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...uxfoundation.org, 
	Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>, 
	"open list:SPARSE CHECKER" <linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] compiler.h: add __chkp_no_side_effects() empty
 hint/assertion macro

On Sat, 25 Oct 2025 at 14:15, Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Allow an author to suppress these warnings on _var by adding
> '__chkp_no_side_effects(_var)' to the body of macros which trigger
> that warning.  This may reduce blowouts in CI pipelines.

How about just not doing that checkpatch thing at all if it causes problems?

Seriously, I think checkpatch often causes more problems than it
fixes. If it then causes us to write even uglier macros - and it's not
like our macros are pretty in general - it really is just causing
pain.

I think we should cut down checkpatch to things that are obvious and
real issues. Not things that then cause people to make code worse.

                 Linus