Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

(adding Emese Revfy and Julia Lawall)

On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 23:31 +0000, Roberts, William C wrote:
> The problem starts to get hairy when we think of how often folks roll their own logging macros (see some small sampling at the end).
> 
> I think we would want to add DEBUG DBG and sn?printf and maybe consider dropping the \b on the regex so it's a bit more matchy but still shouldn't
> end up matching on any ASM as you pointed out in the V2 nack.
> 
> Ill break this down into:
> 1. the patch as I know you'll take it, as you wrote it :-P
> 2. Adding to the logging macros
> 3. exploring making it less matchy

checkpatch is a line-oriented bunch of regexes
and doesn't know what is a __printf format.

It won't ever be "perfect" for this sort of
format verification checking.

Another way to do this is to write a gcc compiler
plugin that verifies the %p<foo> format types and
emits a warning/error.

That's probably the "best" solution.

Maybe coccinelle could help too.