On Tue, 13 Oct 2020, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 08:17:34PM +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: > > > If you are suggesting some sort of special code annotation that the tool > > > would understand, I am open to that. But I'm not aware of any even > > > vaguely standard way of marking up a particular function call to > > > indicate it will not return an error. > > > > I cannot yet say if some annotation would work, we, Sudip and me, need to > > investigate. It could be that something like, assert(!IS_ERR(tt)), is > > sufficient to let the tools know that they can safely assume that the > > path they are complaining about is not possible. > > > > We could make the assert() a nop, so it would not effect the resulting > > object code in any way. > > Things like assert() have been rejected numberous times in the past in > the kernel, good luck with that :) > Greg, we have been warned by you now; so, we are well aware what could await us just as numerous others before. Lukas
