Re: [PATCH 08/10] checkpatch: Remove awareness of uninitialized_var() macro

[Joe Perches]

On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:40 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 05:02:29PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 16:32 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > Using uninitialized_var() is dangerous as it papers over real bugs[1]
> > > (or can in the future), and suppresses unrelated compiler warnings
> > > (e.g. "unused variable"). If the compiler thinks it is uninitialized,
> > > either simply initialize the variable or make compiler changes.
> > > 
> > > In preparation for removing[2] the[3] macro[4], effectively revert
> > > commit 16b7f3c89907 ("checkpatch: avoid warning about uninitialized_var()")
> > > and remove all remaining mentions of uninitialized_var().
> > > 
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200603174714.192027-1-glider@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFw+Vbj0i=1TGqCR5vQkCzWJ0QxK6CernOU6eedsudAixw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFwgbgqhbp1fkxvRKEpzyR5J8n1vKT1VZdz9knmPuXhOeg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > > [4] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFz2500WfbKXAx8s67wrm9=yVJu65TpLgN_ybYNv0VEOKA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > 
> > nack.  see below.
> > 
> > I'd prefer a simple revert, but it shouldn't
> > be done here.
> 
> What do you mean? (I can't understand this and "fine by me" below?)

I did write "other than that"...

I mean that the original commit fixed 2 issues,
one with the uninitialized_var addition, and
another with the missing void function declaration.

I think I found the missing void function bit because
the uninitialized_var use looked like a function so I
fixed both things at the same time.

If you change it, please just remove the bit that
checks for uninitialized_var.

Thanks, Joe

> > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > []
> > > @@ -4075,7 +4074,7 @@ sub process {
> > >  		}
> > >  
> > >  # check for function declarations without arguments like "int foo()"
> > > -		if ($line =~ /(\b$Type\s*$Ident)\s*\(\s*\)/) {
> > > +		if ($line =~ /(\b$Type\s+$Ident)\s*\(\s*\)/) {
> > 
> > This isn't right because $Type includes a possible trailing *
> > where there isn't a space between $Type and $Ident
> 
> Ah, hm, that was changed in the mentioned commit:
> 
> -               if ($line =~ /(\b$Type\s+$Ident)\s*\(\s*\)/) {
> +               if ($line =~ /(\b$Type\s*$Ident)\s*\(\s*\)/) {
> 
> > e.g.:	int *bar(void);
> > 
> > Other than that, fine by me...
> 
> Thanks for looking it over! I'll adjust it however you'd like. :)
>