[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1486771260.2192.39.camel@perches.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:01:00 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>,
Andew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage
On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 23:54 +0000, Roberts, William C wrote:
> > The problem starts to get hairy when we think of how often folks roll their own
> > logging macros (see some small sampling at the end).
It's not just the "hairy" local macros.
In its current form, checkpatch could not find uses like:
netif_<foo>(x, y, z,
"some string with %pk",
args);
and
some_logging_function(arg, "string 1" CONSTANT "string 2", etc...)
if string 2 or CONSTANT had the "%pk" use.
and a bunch of other styles.
This really needs to be verified by the compiler.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
