Message-ID: <1415215852.6634.21.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add --strict test for function pointer
 calling style
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:30:52 -0800
In-Reply-To: <545A76B7.1060801@hurleysoftware.com>
References: <1415208392-16189-1-git-send-email-peter@hurleysoftware.com>
	 <1415208392-16189-3-git-send-email-peter@hurleysoftware.com>
	 <1415212917.6634.17.camel@perches.com>
	 <545A76B7.1060801@hurleysoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 14:12 -0500, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 11/05/2014 01:41 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Peter Hurley wrote:
> > 
> > The use of older function ptr calling style, (*fn)(), makes static
> > analysis more error-prone; replace with modern fn() style.
> > 
> > So make checkpatch emit a --strict test for that condition.
> > 
> > Update the unnecessary parentheses test for dereferencing
> > objects at the same time and create a $fix mechanism too.
> 
> Cool.
> 
> perl's not my thing; how does it know not to trip up on
> 
> 	initcall_t *call;
> 
> 	(*call)();
> 
> [which I verified it properly does not flag in drivers/tty/tty_io.c]

because the regex only matches "(foo->bar)("

It doesn't match (*foo->bar)("

and foo->bar could be any number of -> or . uses like

"(foo->bar.baz)("

or

"( foo -> bar . baz ) ("

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/