From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752354AbbE0HVU (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 27 May 2015 03:21:20 -0400
Received: from hofr.at ([212.69.189.236]:58668 "EHLO mail.hofr.at"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751384AbbE0HVT (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 27 May 2015 03:21:19 -0400
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 09:21:17 +0200
From: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@hofr.at>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Cc: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Seth Jennings <sjenning@redhat.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
        Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] livepatch: match return value to function signature
Message-ID: <20150527072117.GA32268@opentech.at>
References: <1431323549-27343-1-git-send-email-hofrat@osadl.org> <5550674A.4030203@suse.cz> <20150527065605.GA11782@opentech.at> <55656EBC.4030200@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55656EBC.4030200@suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 27 May 2015, Jiri Slaby wrote:

> On 05/27/2015, 08:56 AM, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 May 2015, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > 
> >> On 05/11/2015, 07:52 AM, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> >>> klp_initialized() should return bool but is actually returning 
> >>> struct kobject * - convert it to a boolean explicitly.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org>
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
> >>
> > sorry for the noise - discussions about a similar "cleanup" in RCU
> > resulted Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> clarifying the matter - this
> > explicit conversion makes static code checkers happy but is not
> > needed for gcc (or C for that mater) - see 
> >   http://lkml.org/lkml/2015/5/24/47
> >   and ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (c99) 6.8.6.4 subclause 3)
> 
> Oh yes and I seem to be inconsistent with replies:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/5/26/90
> 
> > hofrat
> 
> You? Nuremberg, 2010, Stanse?
>
Nop - coccinelle scripts - but I guess other static code checkers would 
have that issue as well if they look at types of variables and not take 
possible implicit conversions into account.

stanse is on my TODO list for SIL2LinuxMP (formal qualification of Linux
according to IEC 61508 Ed 2 to Systematic Capability level SC 2)

thx!
hofrat