From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4572C41621 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 15:37:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF43320714 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 15:37:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1585064275; bh=XWqetTA32I53c5P8S/oKOfl+VkXjOX16eJWZLMzOkxE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=p/BKf4IaZOuuOztlldM45CwtTTUJpvgdRZl1c7ClhxIa+LgxkZXnW+yE6VfVjm1FV 57rqM4iLep1DgJ4b0rofBeqH/cVl721zTEbaJhjYwg2825pNRLQeasMSv12zWYiiTH z7/3Ln5RBDSIQuTxntZroqAFpAkx48RHJnDBBTuo= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728813AbgCXPhz (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 11:37:55 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:60664 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728743AbgCXPhk (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 11:37:40 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (236.31.169.217.in-addr.arpa [217.169.31.236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0501920714; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 15:37:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1585064260; bh=XWqetTA32I53c5P8S/oKOfl+VkXjOX16eJWZLMzOkxE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=X2t5R6HqMQbGBFIPAA+m6IOSLwhb7FStDZ8NFam625QSOCw14mFlTiBsnuvoca/Wy F9ymQwGi3yTJSwaDwLbIRHrePiqOWHxe3LDUbMKaJuAIGjTipAHROumUZNcee+9+XJ 1kvxdazNh14ZQQAwicQRBhJkCu/JdSz+UnWDb78U= From: Will Deacon To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Will Deacon , Eric Dumazet , Jann Horn , Kees Cook , Maddie Stone , Marco Elver , "Paul E . McKenney" , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , kernel-team@android.com, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com Subject: [RFC PATCH 20/21] list: Format CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION error messages consistently Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 15:36:42 +0000 Message-Id: <20200324153643.15527-21-will@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1 In-Reply-To: <20200324153643.15527-1-will@kernel.org> References: <20200324153643.15527-1-will@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org The error strings printed when list data corruption is detected are formatted inconsistently. Satisfy my inner-pedant by consistently using ':' to limit the message from its prefix and drop the terminating full stops where they exist. Signed-off-by: Will Deacon --- lib/list_debug.c | 18 +++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/list_debug.c b/lib/list_debug.c index 3be50b5c8014..00e414508f93 100644 --- a/lib/list_debug.c +++ b/lib/list_debug.c @@ -23,10 +23,10 @@ bool __list_add_valid(struct list_head *new, struct list_head *prev, struct list_head *next) { if (CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next->prev != prev, - "list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev (%px), but was %px. (next=%px).\n", + "list_add corruption: next->prev should be prev (%px), but was %px (next=%px)\n", prev, next->prev, next) || CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev->next != next, - "list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (%px), but was %px. (prev=%px).\n", + "list_add corruption: prev->next should be next (%px), but was %px (prev=%px)\n", next, prev->next, prev) || CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(new == prev || new == next, "list_add double add: new=%px, prev=%px, next=%px.\n", @@ -45,16 +45,16 @@ bool __list_del_entry_valid(struct list_head *entry) next = entry->next; if (CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next == LIST_POISON1, - "list_del corruption, %px->next is LIST_POISON1 (%px)\n", + "list_del corruption: %px->next is LIST_POISON1 (%px)\n", entry, LIST_POISON1) || CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev == LIST_POISON2, - "list_del corruption, %px->prev is LIST_POISON2 (%px)\n", + "list_del corruption: %px->prev is LIST_POISON2 (%px)\n", entry, LIST_POISON2) || CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev->next != entry, - "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %px, but was %px\n", + "list_del corruption: prev->next should be %px, but was %px\n", entry, prev->next) || CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next->prev != entry, - "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %px, but was %px\n", + "list_del corruption: next->prev should be %px, but was %px\n", entry, next->prev)) return false; @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ bool __hlist_bl_add_head_valid(struct hlist_bl_node *new, unsigned long nlock = (unsigned long)new & LIST_BL_LOCKMASK; if (CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(nlock, - "hlist_bl_add_head: node is locked\n") || + "hlist_bl_add_head corruption: node is locked\n") || CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(hlock != LIST_BL_LOCKMASK, "hlist_bl_add_head: head is unlocked\n")) return false; @@ -222,10 +222,10 @@ bool __hlist_bl_del_valid(struct hlist_bl_node *node) if (CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(nlock, "hlist_bl_del corruption: node is locked") || CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next == LIST_POISON1, - "hlist_bl_del corruption, %px->next is LIST_POISON1 (%px)\n", + "hlist_bl_del corruption: %px->next is LIST_POISON1 (%px)\n", node, LIST_POISON1) || CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(node->pprev == LIST_POISON2, - "hlist_bl_del corruption, %px->pprev is LIST_POISON2 (%px)\n", + "hlist_bl_del corruption: %px->pprev is LIST_POISON2 (%px)\n", node, LIST_POISON2)) return false; -- 2.20.1