On Thu, 8 Feb 2018, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 01:53:54PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > > This checks for a comparison using < or > between two constants, > > considering both explicit constants (1, 2, etc) and macros defined > > with #define. False positives are possible in the latter case, when > > a macro may have multiple possible definitions and it is indeed > > necessary to check the value. There are currently two such false > > positives, in drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb3/sge.c: > > > > q->fl[0].use_pages = FL0_PG_CHUNK_SIZE > 0; > > q->fl[1].use_pages = FL1_PG_CHUNK_SIZE > 0; > > > > We could eliminate both these false postives by ignoring >> vs >. Did > searching for > actually find any bugs? I think you were right that > right shifting a constant is way less common than left shifting and I > have some smatch scripts where I ignore right shifting bugs. > > On the other hand, two false positives are not a big deal. I found no bugs with > at the moment. I figured that the person could have just as easily written 0 < FL0_PG_CHUNK_SIZE, so it was not worth making a special case. But if anyone wants me to drop the case id > cst, then I can do that. thanks, julia -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
