From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Possible code defects: macros and precedence
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 14:57:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1474149472.1954.6.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1609172221110.3124@hadrien>
On Sat, 2016-09-17 at 22:24 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
(A 2.2MB message that (perhaps thankfully) didn't get through to lkml)
> Below is the Coccinelle output for the case where the definition of the
> macro is a single expression. There is also the case where it is a
> sequence of statements, but that finds very few results. Note that
> Coccinelle will only match code that it can parse, which is definitely not
> always the case for macros, so some things may be missed.
>
> There are a huge number of results. To the extent that you have the
> patience to look through them, do you see anything undesirable?
>
> thanks,
> julia
>
> diff -u -p a/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h b/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> --- a/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> +++ b/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
> @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ typedef struct _U64_S { u64 v; } U64_S;
> #define PUT8(s, d) (A64(d) = A64(s))
>
> #define LZ4_READ_LITTLEENDIAN_16(d, s, p) \
> - (d = s - A16(p))
> + (d = (s) - A16(p))
>
> #define LZ4_WRITE_LITTLEENDIAN_16(p, v) \
> do { \
> @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ typedef struct _U64_S { u64 v; } U64_S;
> put_unaligned(get_unaligned((const u64 *) s), (u64 *) d)
>
> #define LZ4_READ_LITTLEENDIAN_16(d, s, p) \
> - (d = s - get_unaligned_le16(p))
> + (d = (s) - get_unaligned_le16(p))
>
> #define LZ4_WRITE_LITTLEENDIAN_16(p, v) \
> do { \
Here's the equivalent checkpatch output for that file.
It has a few more instances.
Is what checkpatch suggests unreasonable?
$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -f --strict lib/lz4/lz4defs.h --types=macro_arg_precedence
CHECK: Macro argument 's' may be better as '(s)' to avoid precedence issues
#36: FILE: lib/lz4/lz4defs.h:36:
+#define LZ4_READ_LITTLEENDIAN_16(d, s, p) \
+ (d = s - A16(p))
CHECK: Macro argument 's' may be better as '(s)' to avoid precedence issues
#55: FILE: lib/lz4/lz4defs.h:55:
+#define LZ4_READ_LITTLEENDIAN_16(d, s, p) \
+ (d = s - get_unaligned_le16(p))
CHECK: Macro argument 'd' may be better as '(d)' to avoid precedence issues
#106: FILE: lib/lz4/lz4defs.h:106:
+#define LZ4_SECURECOPY(s, d, e) \
+ do { \
+ if (d < e) { \
+ LZ4_WILDCOPY(s, d, e); \
+ } \
+ } while (0)
CHECK: Macro argument 'e' may be better as '(e)' to avoid precedence issues
#106: FILE: lib/lz4/lz4defs.h:106:
+#define LZ4_SECURECOPY(s, d, e) \
+ do { \
+ if (d < e) { \
+ LZ4_WILDCOPY(s, d, e); \
+ } \
+ } while (0)
CHECK: Macro argument 'e' may be better as '(e)' to avoid precedence issues
#147: FILE: lib/lz4/lz4defs.h:147:
+#define LZ4_WILDCOPY(s, d, e) \
+ do { \
+ LZ4_COPYPACKET(s, d); \
+ } while (d < e)
CHECK: Macro argument 'l' may be better as '(l)' to avoid precedence issues
#152: FILE: lib/lz4/lz4defs.h:152:
+#define LZ4_BLINDCOPY(s, d, l) \
+ do { \
+ u8 *e = (d) + l; \
+ LZ4_WILDCOPY(s, d, e); \
+ d = e; \
+ } while (0)
total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 6 checks, 157 lines checked
NOTE: For some of the reported defects, checkpatch may be able to
mechanically convert to the typical style using --fix or --fix-inplace.
lib/lz4/lz4defs.h has style problems, please review.
NOTE: Used message types: MACRO_ARG_PRECEDENCE
NOTE: If any of the errors are false positives, please report
them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-17 21:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-03 18:35 Possible code defects: macros and precedence Joe Perches
2016-09-03 20:18 ` Dan Carpenter
2016-09-03 22:20 ` [PATCH] checkpatch: Add a --strict test for macro argument reuse " Joe Perches
2016-09-04 14:42 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-04 10:10 ` Possible code defects: macros " Julia Lawall
2016-09-04 15:06 ` Joe Perches
[not found] ` <alpine.DEB.2.10.1609172221110.3124@hadrien>
2016-09-17 21:27 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-18 5:09 ` Julia Lawall
2016-09-18 9:31 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-20 13:14 ` Julia Lawall
2016-09-20 17:07 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-20 18:03 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-20 23:47 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-21 5:04 ` Julia Lawall
2016-09-17 21:57 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2016-09-18 4:57 ` Julia Lawall
2016-09-18 9:27 ` Joe Perches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1474149472.1954.6.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.