lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Oct]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 1/8] selftests: Add printf attribute to kselftest prints
From
On 10/12/23 01:32, Maciej Wieczór-Retman wrote:
> On 2023-10-11 at 13:40:48 -0600, Shuah wrote:
>> On 10/11/23 02:23, Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote:
>>> Kselftest header defines multiple variadic functions that use printf
>>> along with other logic.
>>>
>>> There is no format checking for the variadic functions that use
>>> printing inside kselftest.h. Because of this the compiler won't
>>> be able to catch instances of mismatched printf formats and debugging
>>> tests might be more difficult.
>>>
>>> Add the common __printf attribute macro to kselftest.h.
>>>
>>> Add __printf attribute to every function using formatted printing with
>>> variadic arguments.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Maciej Wieczor-Retman <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> Changelog v4:
>>> - Fix typo in patch subject. (Reinette)
>>> - Add Reinette's reviewed-by tag.
>>>
>>
>> I still need information on how you found these problems. Please
>> add it to change log for each of these patches.
>
> Sure, I'll add notes on methodology to patches 2-8. I understand that
> this patch (1/8) message doesn't need that addition since the problems
> it exposes are in separate patches.
>

Yes please. As mentioned a couple of times, I would like to see how
the problem is found in each patch commit log.

> Or would you like me to also note here more specifically what effect it
> has in the rest of the series?
>

Yes please.

>> I am seeing checkpatch warning:
>>
>> WARNING: Prefer __printf(a, b) over __attribute__((format(printf, a, b)))
>> #102: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h:81:
>> +#define __printf(a, b) __attribute__((format(printf, a, b)))
>
> Running checkpatch.pl with --show-types shows the
> PREFER_DEFINED_ATTRIBUTE_MACRO is raised. From looking at the error
> message in the script it looks like a false positive:
> "Prefer $new over __attribute__(($orig_attr$params))\n"
>
> Please correct me if my train of thought is wrong but I think checkpatch
> sees __printf() macro defined and it sees it's raw version
> "__attribute__((format(printf, a, b)))" which it wants to replace with
> the macro. But since the raw version is found in the define line that is
> obviously not possible.
>

This is fine.

thanks,
-- Shuah

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-10-12 16:32    [W:0.122 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site