From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932381AbdK0RdK (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:33:10 -0500 Received: from ale.deltatee.com ([207.54.116.67]:56860 "EHLO ale.deltatee.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753872AbdK0RdI (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:33:08 -0500 To: Joe Perches , Julia Lawall Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft References: <20171126054037.9743-1-logang@deltatee.com> <1511676085.20482.18.camel@perches.com> <5c0a2778-8e8f-9fbb-b13f-1d880acb949b@deltatee.com> <1511735382.20482.27.camel@perches.com> <1511745165.20482.34.camel@perches.com> <1511774737.32426.29.camel@perches.com> <6d424a99-7c3a-9d15-5651-030f52367749@deltatee.com> <1511803565.32426.52.camel@perches.com> From: Logan Gunthorpe Message-ID: <0d316f3a-bcb7-439c-fad3-90ffaad73e59@deltatee.com> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:33:02 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1511803565.32426.52.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 172.16.1.162 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: apw@canonical.com, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, julia.lawall@lip6.fr, joe@perches.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: logang@deltatee.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch: Add a warning for log messages that don't end in a new line X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 02 Aug 2016 21:08:31 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on ale.deltatee.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> This is a valid false positive that I also missed. However, it can >> actually be very easily ignored by checking if the format string ends in >> %pV. There were about 100 cases in my results that match this. > > No, it can't be done that way. > > $ git grep '%pV\\n"' | wc -l > 56 > $ git grep '%pV"' | wc -l > 146 > > AFAIK: all of the above are correct as-is. Yes, I'm saying they are correct too. So the script would very easily notice this and not produce a warning. The first grep you did already weren't false positives because they ended in \\n and wouldn't have produced a warning. A very simple change to my patch ignores the second group. So what's wrong here? Logan