From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
'Andrew Morton' <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] checkpatch: check for function calls with struct or union on stack
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 10:20:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b8d9aa953d1e760b35bd4ef6c689dfb777c8a6a0.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1807280823200.2466@hadrien>
(unintentionally sent partial reply, better now)
On Sat, 2018-07-28 at 08:25 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
[]
> > It might make sense for this sort of check to be
> > added to coccinelle or maybe as a compiler warning
> > when the struct is larger than some size.
> >
> > Original thread for Julia:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/967890/
>
> Coccinelle doesn't directly know the size of the structure, but it can
> count the number of fields. Maybe a case with an update in the function
> body
Perhaps this might be the most useful to check.
> or at least 3 fields is worth reporting on?
Maybe, maybe not. For instance:
lib/vsprintf.c uses struct printf_spec which is
5 fields totaling 8 bytes and that fits nicely in
a single register on x86-64 so there are good
reasons why structs could be passed by value.
Maybe structs with arrays or other structs would
make more sense.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-28 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-26 18:27 [RFC PATCH] checkpatch: check for function calls with struct or union on stack Joe Perches
2018-07-26 19:25 ` Andrew Morton
2018-07-26 19:28 ` Andrew Morton
2018-07-26 20:05 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-26 20:38 ` Andrew Morton
2018-07-27 10:04 ` David Laight
2018-07-27 10:08 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-27 10:21 ` David Laight
2018-07-27 10:36 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-28 6:25 ` Julia Lawall
2018-07-28 17:14 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-28 17:24 ` Julia Lawall
2018-07-28 17:20 ` Joe Perches [this message]
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=b8d9aa953d1e760b35bd4ef6c689dfb777c8a6a0.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apw@canonical.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).