On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 22:26 +0000, Roberts, William C wrote: > <snip> > > > > > > > On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 11:37 -0800, [email protected] wrote: > > > > From: William Roberts <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Sample output: > > > > WARNING: %pk is close to %pK, did you mean %pK?. > > > > \#20: FILE: drivers/char/applicom.c:230: > > > > + printk(KERN_INFO "Could not allocate IRQ %d for > > > > PCI > > > > > > Applicom > > > > +device. %pk\n", dev->irq, pci_get_class); > > > > > > There isn't a single instance of this in the kernel tree. > > > > > > Maybe if this is really useful, then all the %p<foo> extensions should > > > be enumerated and all unknown uses should have warnings. > > > > I was thinking of doing that, but I figured I would start with the bare > > minimum > > patch. > > > > > > > > Something like: > > > > > > --- > > > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 9 +++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index > > > ad5ea5c545b2..8a90b457e8b5 100755 > > > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > > @@ -5305,6 +5305,15 @@ sub process { > > > } > > > } > > > > > > +# check for vsprintf extension %p<foo> misuses > > > + if ($line =~ /\b$logFunctions\s*\(.*$String/) { > > I don't see the normal string formatting routines in that list... I think > this is too restrictive.
I don't. There are no "normal" string formatting routines. What do you think is missing? sn?printf ? That's easy to add.
