On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 01:45:52PM -0700, Jonathan Tan wrote: > The following comments are assuming that we're going to standardize on > UNLEAK(var); (with the semicolon).
Yeah, I assumed we would. We don't have to, since this really is sort-of magical, but I think the code looks better with it. > On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 02:38:41 -0400 > Jeff King <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +#ifdef SUPPRESS_ANNOTATED_LEAKS > > +extern void unleak_memory(const void *ptr, size_t len); > > +#define UNLEAK(var) unleak_memory(&(var), sizeof(var)); > > I would feel better if the semicolon was omitted. I don't think it > matters in this particular case, though. You end up with a double semi-colon. Some linters might complain. > > +#else > > +#define UNLEAK(var) > > I think this should be defined to be something (for example, "do {} > while (0)"), at least so that we have compiler errors when UNLEAK(var) > is used incorrectly (for example, without the semicolon) when > SUPPRESS_ANNOTATED_LEAKS is not defined. Seems reasonable. I think both are worth doing, but the patch is already in next so we need to do it on top. Do you want to prepare a patch? -Peff
