Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Apr 2015 22:57:54 +0200 | From | Mateusz Kulikowski <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] checkpatch: suggest using eth_zero_addr() and eth_broadcast_addr() |
| |
Hi Joe,
On 20.04.2015 03:13, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 00:16 +0200, Mateusz Kulikowski wrote: >> Suggest using eth_zero_addr() or eth_broadcast_addr() instead of memset(). > > Hi again Mateusz > >> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > [] >> @@ -5042,6 +5042,22 @@ sub process { >> "Prefer ether_addr_equal() or ether_addr_equal_unaligned() over memcmp()\n" . $herecurr) >> } >> >> +# check for memset(foo, 0x0, ETH_ALEN) that could be eth_zero_addr >> +# check for memset(foo, 0xFF, ETH_ALEN) that could be eth_broadcast_addr >> + if ($^V && $^V ge 5.10.0 && >> + $line =~ /^\+(?:.*?)\bmemset\s*\(\s*$FuncArg\s*,\s*$FuncArg\s*\,\s*ETH_ALEN\s*\)/s) { > > Because you are working with $line and not $stat, > the last /s isn't useful here. > > $line is always a single line.
Perhaps it would be smarter to use (for both patches) $stat instead. This applies also to existing checks (like PREFER_ETHER_ADDR_COPY) so we can catch calls formatted like
memset(very.long.structure->something.something_different42, 0xFF, ETH_ALEN);
Regards, Mateusz
| |