<snip>

> >
> > On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 11:37 -0800, william.c.robe...@intel.com wrote:
> > > From: William Roberts <william.c.robe...@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.
> 
> I was thinking of doing that, but I figured I would start with the bare 
> minimum
> patch.
> 
> >
> > 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/) {

I don't see the normal string formatting routines in that list... I think this 
is too restrictive.

> > +                   my $format = get_quoted_string($line, $rawline);

Ahh thanks for that get_quoted_string().

> > +                   if ($format =~
> > /(\%[\*\d\.]*p(?![\WFfSsBKRraEhMmIiUDdgVCbGN]).)/) {
> > +                           WARN("VSPRINTF_POINTER_EXTENSION",
> > +                                "Invalid vsprintf pointer extension 
> > '$1'\n" .
> > $herecurr);

I think I'll send out a V2 with this part of the addition. I like that, and 
your wording.

> > +                   }
> > +           }
> > +
> >  # check for logging continuations
> >             if ($line =~ /\bprintk\s*\(\s*KERN_CONT\b|\bpr_cont\s*\(/) {
> >                     WARN("LOGGING_CONTINUATION",

I did a grep on some of the patters to see what it would match against

Reply via email to