From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753236AbdBJThy (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:37:54 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:8326 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752942AbdBJThx (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:37:53 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,142,1484035200"; d="scan'208";a="1093296265" From: william.c.roberts@intel.com To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, joe@perches.com, apw@canonical.com Cc: keescook@chromium.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, William Roberts Subject: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning on %pk instead of %pK usage Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 11:37:49 -0800 Message-Id: <1486755469-21573-1-git-send-email-william.c.roberts@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.7.4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: William Roberts 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); Signed-off-by: William Roberts --- scripts/checkpatch.pl | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index 982c52c..f20f5c5 100755 --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl @@ -6096,6 +6096,12 @@ sub process { "recursive locking is bad, do not use this ever.\n" . $herecurr); } +# check for bad %pK usage + if ($rawline =~ /\%pk/) { + WARN("FORMAT SPECIFIER", + "%pk is close to %pK, did you mean %pK?.\n" . $herecurr); + } + # check for lockdep_set_novalidate_class if ($line =~ /^.\s*lockdep_set_novalidate_class\s*\(/ || $line =~ /__lockdep_no_validate__\s*\)/ ) { -- 2.7.4