From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-23.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF856C433ED for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 16:11:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0B4A61059 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 16:11:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235848AbhEFQMv (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2021 12:12:51 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42534 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235395AbhEFQMu (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2021 12:12:50 -0400 Received: from mail-oo1-xc35.google.com (mail-oo1-xc35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c35]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98180C061574 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 09:11:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oo1-xc35.google.com with SMTP id s24-20020a4aead80000b02901fec6deb28aso1345659ooh.11 for ; Thu, 06 May 2021 09:11:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qeQfKYm2bS74Zn3vvyUj9tpVPEGDUabI+L4zJ/QF7Ws=; b=DKmRPn6skb/CCNECeRh0U3xJqCuPavQHF1tJi/vLpW9GR0nRxKhhojPJ1ryQsp9hwL Fbc5GqHiGsJSt/ehqDybO9zqplZwOe0nNdTT4wFvv8kKAwb+078Dh/VH46PNklfkBbVn Suoix3Q5etSUC3PxBFt0OeNI5BCezcA8r2rIadoLeQKEw1RKuLnEHDnEVxgrDF2GupRc +tcOTBra+WLRwQeaNSgdUql5rPMblTvi75379dFGw8sZJl9udXO7JlqhiF1Oaoc/b5JP yN7wRK0gyYCdkX5sJZRDoOk+zspBrMQ5BqaDbE50PIlETmKkvcFQ7Qu09t4T3L1Guwsd p4hA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qeQfKYm2bS74Zn3vvyUj9tpVPEGDUabI+L4zJ/QF7Ws=; b=i+ZrIZqKBDtxJWbF0KS+cazUhMWFiju2J/nPXBrk0ufX6rMg4s/EkN2PFu+njxpEEa z0cLDboluj8jdBzGf6jNBF/FPbWks+Kq02CagRwXHhLRqQjnV6av3Pl/bQkGS66Bed4+ eT0UA6RyeeeULBkUabhUytX8LDPyTy5ryssDYmaO87mhUSI4zOjpfZpJthBn7N81A1rY cdXBYtJlMsSLnRF44Yisg7QuBY6n9QraLIDW9l3twJGYDMRCLwibcMHUydtzu6lWPhAa mdOYjfmqM3IAIWiuW28vAD/cAvYJ96vTcNY2Ugz0wXEopEsSRHTyMWteEvvRLoFNxEtr xhLw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533TCPh38aHSaE0sj8wuCfw+ECe1FBd1X6dt/eromDvHu/KJczpf wnhsuCab3Xr2Guor+vJ+elUppGiCsRJFGqcYiU4ptg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwZowjdjz6M7oOMBaQIM/f1bFeevFTXYG6HrMP8e+Q4Hrgud/16vePb/aywo7/ti11PECmx5C3WN86KsBMb8LE= X-Received: by 2002:a4a:e715:: with SMTP id y21mr4106465oou.54.1620317511833; Thu, 06 May 2021 09:11:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210506132827.3198497-1-elver@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Marco Elver Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 18:11:40 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: warn about direct use of send_sig_info and force_sig_info To: Lukas Bulwahn Cc: Dwaipayan Ray , "Eric W . Biederman" , linux-kernel , Andy Whitcroft , Joe Perches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 18:02, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: > On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 5:02 PM Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > > On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 6:59 PM Marco Elver wrote: > > > > > > Setting up siginfo and using send_sig_info() and force_sig_info() > > > directly is discouraged. Instead, new code wanting to generate signals > > > should use the appropriate helper specific to the signal. > > > > > > Eric mentioned that he'd like to make these static at some point, but > > > until that can happen, let's try to avoid introducing new users of them. > > > > > > Cc: Eric W. Biederman > > > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver > > > --- > > > Eric, > > > > > > While siginfo doesn't need changing often, when it does, it's quite the > > > adventure. We now have the various static asserts. The other thing is > > > usage of {send,force}_sig_info. > > > > > > I think the best option right now is to teach checkpatch.pl about it > > > until they become static. > > > > > > Fyi, I noticed one such new user here: > > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210421024826.13529-1-wangjunqiang@iscas.ac.cn > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -- Marco > > > --- > > > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 6 ++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > > index ccb412a74725..3a86aafc3bcd 100755 > > > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > > @@ -7153,6 +7153,12 @@ sub process { > > > "Where possible, use lockdep_assert_held instead of assertions based on spin_is_locked\n" . $herecurr); > > > } > > > > > > +# check for direct use of send_sig_info(), force_sig_info() > > > + if ($line =~ /\b((force|send)_sig_info)\(/) { > > > > I think this might be a little better as: > > if ($line =~ /\b((?:force|send)_sig_info)\(/) { > > > > Otherwise it's good as it is. > > Tested-by: Dwaipayan Ray > > > > Dwaipayan, do you want to also document this new rule on the > checkpatch documentation? > Marco, maybe you can assist us here with some pointer (lore.kernel.org > link) to the original discussion you had. It started somewhere here: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/m17dkjttpj.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org Eric has the full history here -- if I missed something, hopefully he'll nack or ack. Thanks, -- Marco