Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1578772
| From | Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage |
| Date | 2017-02-10 21:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t9pPH-8bb-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <t9pd0-7Ix-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 11:37 -0800, william.c.roberts@intel.com wrote:
> From: William Roberts <william.c.roberts@intel.com>
>
> Sample output:
> WARNING: %pk is close to %pK, did you mean %pK?.
> \#20: FILE: drivers/char/applicom.c:230:
> + printk(KERN_INFO "Could not allocate IRQ %d for PCI Applicom device. %pk\n", dev->irq, pci_get_class);
There isn't a single instance of this in the kernel tree.
Maybe if this is really useful, then all the %p<foo> extensions
should be enumerated and all unknown uses should have warnings.
Something like:
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 9 +++++++++
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index ad5ea5c545b2..8a90b457e8b5 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -5305,6 +5305,15 @@ sub process {
}
}
+# check for vsprintf extension %p<foo> misuses
+ if ($line =~ /\b$logFunctions\s*\(.*$String/) {
+ my $format = get_quoted_string($line, $rawline);
+ if ($format =~ /(\%[\*\d\.]*p(?![\WFfSsBKRraEhMmIiUDdgVCbGN]).)/) {
+ WARN("VSPRINTF_POINTER_EXTENSION",
+ "Invalid vsprintf pointer extension '$1'\n" . $herecurr);
+ }
+ }
+
# check for logging continuations
if ($line =~ /\bprintk\s*\(\s*KERN_CONT\b|\bpr_cont\s*\(/) {
WARN("LOGGING_CONTINUATION",
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage william.c.roberts@intel.com - 2017-02-10 20:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-02-10 21:20 +0100
RE: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@intel.com> - 2017-02-10 23:20 +0100
RE: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@intel.com> - 2017-02-10 23:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-02-11 00:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-02-11 00:00 +0100
RE: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@intel.com> - 2017-02-11 00:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-02-11 00:50 +0100
RE: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@intel.com> - 2017-02-11 01:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-02-11 01:10 +0100
RE: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@intel.com> - 2017-02-11 02:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2017-02-11 04:30 +0100
csiph-web