Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [Ksummit-discuss] checkkpatch (in)sanity ? | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Mon, 29 Aug 2016 12:21:37 -0700 |
| |
On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 12:10 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 10:06:18PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > > I would like a couple changes which you know already: > > > > 1) Get rid of PREFER_ETHER_ADDR_COPY and similar because the people who > > send checkpatch.pl fixes aren't qualified to say when it's legal or not > > so they sometimes introduce bugs. > I do think we should have *something* that catches such things. > Perhaps not checkpatch.pl, though. Perhaps a compiler plugin that > generates additional warnings, and can perhaps use more global > information to determine legality?
nit: validity rather than legality.
There are still rather a lot of these.
$ git grep -E "\bmem.*,\s*(ETH_ALEN|6)\s*\);" | wc -l 1776
Dunno if any of them are in performance sensitive areas where it actually matters.
Someone, I forget who, had a concern about the object being set possibly being in a struct where it's possible for the alignment of the set object to be altered by another change like adding a new member.
| |