Re: [cocci] Searching for special function implementations with SmPL

[Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>]

On Sun, 2023-01-29 at 21:09 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2023, Luca Coelho wrote:
> > On Sun, 2023-01-29 at 19:55 +0200, Luca Coelho wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2023-01-29 at 18:28 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > What version of Coccinelle do you have?  Someone (Kees?) reported a
> > > > problem with the collecion of header files at one point fairly
> > > > recently, and I think I fixed it.  It should be available in the
> > > > github version of Coccinelle.
> > > 
> > > This is what I have:
> > > 
> > > luca@kveik:~/gfx/linux-drm-tip$ spatch --version
> > > spatch version 1.1.1 compiled with OCaml version 4.13.1
> > > Flags passed to the configure script: --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc --libdir=/usr/lib --enable-ocaml --enable-python --with-python=python3 --enable-opt
> > > OCaml scripting support: yes
> > > Python scripting support: yes
> > > Syntax of regular expressions: PCRE
> > > 
> > > It's the standard one from Debian testing.
> > > 
> > > I'll try the github version.  Thanks for pointing out!
> > 
> > It seems to be working slightly better, but it's still not finding all
> > the occurrences that I find by calling spatch with all the files
> > individually... :( I tried the latest head from github,
> > 87350d742df39d847b15af39865329c2fe23460d.
> 
> Could you give a specific case that idn't found?

Sorry, false alarm.  I was running spatch by itself on an inner
directory (.../i915/display), but when I used find, I was using
.../i915, so there was one more match happening there.

So, it seems that the latest head _does_ work fine! And I'm gettign all
the matches and changes that I expect.  Thanks!

I really appreciate your promptness in responding and helping with all
this.  I will probably come back with more questions soon, when I start
trying other rules. 🙂

--
Cheers,
Luca.