(adding Emese Revfy and Julia Lawall) On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 23:31 +0000, Roberts, William C wrote: > The problem starts to get hairy when we think of how often folks roll their > own logging macros (see some small sampling at the end). > > I think we would want to add DEBUG DBG and sn?printf and maybe consider > dropping the \b on the regex so it's a bit more matchy but still shouldn't > end up matching on any ASM as you pointed out in the V2 nack. > > Ill break this down into: > 1. the patch as I know you'll take it, as you wrote it :-P > 2. Adding to the logging macros > 3. exploring making it less matchy
checkpatch is a line-oriented bunch of regexes and doesn't know what is a __printf format. It won't ever be "perfect" for this sort of format verification checking. Another way to do this is to write a gcc compiler plugin that verifies the %p<foo> format types and emits a warning/error. That's probably the "best" solution. Maybe coccinelle could help too.
