On 2/21/24 02:27, David Gow wrote:
KUnit has several macros which accept a log message, which can contain printf format specifiers. Some of these (the explicit log macros) already use the __printf() gcc attribute to ensure the format specifiers are valid, but those which could fail the test, and hence used __kunit_do_failed_assertion() behind the scenes, did not. These include: - KUNIT_EXPECT_*_MSG() - KUNIT_ASSERT_*_MSG() - KUNIT_FAIL() This series adds the __printf() attribute, and fixes all of the issues uncovered. (Or, at least, all of those I could find with an x86_64 allyesconfig, and the default KUnit config on a number of other architectures. Please test!) The issues in question basically take the following forms: - int / long / long long confusion: typically a type being updated, but the format string not. - Use of integer format specifiers (%d/%u/%li/etc) for types like size_t or pointer differences (technically ptrdiff_t), which would only work on some architectures. - Use of integer format specifiers in combination with PTR_ERR(), where %pe would make more sense. - Use of empty messages which, whilst technically not incorrect, are not useful and trigger a gcc warning. We'd like to get these (or equivalent) in for 6.9 if possible, so please do take a look if possible. Thanks, -- David Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/CAHk-=wgJMOquDO5f8ShH1f4rzZwzApNVCw643m5-Yj+BfsFstA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Thank you for a quick response David. I will apply the series to kunit next for Linux 6.9 as soon as the reviews are complete. thanks, -- Shuah
