From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: Wen Yang <wen.yang99@zte.com.cn>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Yi Wang <wang.yi59@zte.com.cn>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
Wen Yang <yellowriver2010@hotmail.com>,
Cheng Shengyu <cheng.shengyu@zte.com.cn>,
cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v5] Coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device()
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 14:24:40 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1902151423370.3617@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a35e9d4a-1166-c794-732e-3e7ec0063c77@web.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1262 bytes --]
On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >>> +id = of_find_device_by_node@p1(x)
> …
> >>> +if (id == NULL || ...) { ... return ...; }
> >>> +... when != put_device(&id->dev)
> >> …
> >>> + when != if (id) { ... put_device(&id->dev) ... }
> >> …
> >>
> >> I would interpret this SmPL code in the way that the if statement
> >> for the pointer check is “optional” in this line.
> >> Is it an extra and redundant SmPL specification when the reference
> >> release function could eventually be found just anywhere within
> >> an implementation?
> >
> > The proposed when code is correct.
>
> I agree that this SmPL code can work in the way it was designed.
>
>
> > It is not redundant, because it checks for a particular control-flow pattern.
>
> It took another moment until I dared to express a different software
> development opinion also on this implementation detail.
>
> Does the first SmPL when specification include the case that a call
> of the function “put_device” can occur within a branch of an if statement?
It does include that, but there is another execution path where the
put device is not present. But given the test in the if in the when code,
on that execution path id is NULL, an so there is no need to put it.
julia
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-15 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-15 7:55 [PATCH v5] coccinelle: semantic code search for missing put_device() Wen Yang
2019-02-15 9:10 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-15 12:52 ` [PATCH v5] Coccinelle: " Markus Elfring
2019-02-15 13:02 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-15 13:15 ` [v5] " Markus Elfring
2019-02-15 13:15 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-15 13:24 ` Julia Lawall [this message]
2019-02-15 13:54 ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-17 3:54 ` [PATCH v5] coccinelle: " Masahiro Yamada
2019-03-17 9:05 ` [v5] " Markus Elfring
2019-03-23 16:17 ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-26 6:54 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-03-26 7:19 ` Julia Lawall
2019-03-26 9:14 ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-26 9:04 ` Markus Elfring
2019-03-26 9:52 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-03-26 9:58 ` Julia Lawall
[not found] <201902161529041506841@zte.com.cn>
2019-02-16 8:09 ` [v5] Coccinelle: " Julia Lawall
2019-02-16 8:29 ` Markus Elfring
2019-02-16 8:32 ` Julia Lawall
2019-02-16 8:44 ` Markus Elfring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.20.1902151423370.3617@hadrien \
--to=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=cheng.shengyu@zte.com.cn \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=nicolas.palix@imag.fr \
--cc=wang.yi59@zte.com.cn \
--cc=wen.yang99@zte.com.cn \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
--cc=yellowriver2010@hotmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).